Trump Action Archive

Supporting reports

• Trump administration ICE arrests Venezuelan TPS holders despite legal protections — U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has been unlawfully arresting and detaining Venezuelans with Temporary Protected Status (TPS) at their homes, workplaces, during check-ins, and on streets across Virginia, New York, Texas, and New Mexico. Despite federal law explicitly prohibiting detention of TPS holders based on immigration status, attorneys report detainees have been held for weeks without legal justification. The Trump administration's Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem attempted to revoke TPS for Venezuelans, though a federal judge paused that action on April 7, 2025. Lawyers suggest ICE may be pre-emptively detaining TPS holders in preparation for potential mass deportations.
• Federal judge pauses Kristi Noem's attempt to revoke Venezuelan TPS — A federal judge issued an order pausing Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's attempt to terminate Temporary Protected Status for Venezuelans, which was set to take effect on April 7, 2025. The judge found that revoking TPS for approximately 350,000 Venezuelans would "inflict irreparable harm" on hundreds of thousands of people, cost the U.S. billions in economic activity, and injure public health and safety. The Trump administration had moved quickly to revoke the protections after taking office, despite the Biden administration's prior extension of TPS for Venezuelans facing persecution and humanitarian crisis.

Supporting reports

• State Department revokes visas of approximately 300 students for pro-Palestinian activism — U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that the State Department revoked approximately 300 student visas, stating at a news conference in Guyana that he removes visas from activists he identifies. The revocations target international students engaged in pro-Palestinian activism and demonstrations on U.S. campuses, including students at Columbia University and Tufts University.
• Secretary of State revoked all visas for South Sudanese passport holders — Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that he would revoke all visas held by South Sudanese passport holders and restrict new visas from being issued. No stated justification was provided for the blanket revocation.
• Trump administration revokes all South Sudanese visas in repatriation dispute — The U.S. Department of State, under Secretary Marco Rubio, revoked all visas held by South Sudanese passport-holders and suspended issuance of new visas, effective immediately. The action was taken in response to South Sudan's alleged failure to accept repatriation of one individual. Deputy Secretary Christopher Landau stated that all visa appointments are cancelled and no South Sudanese nationals will enter the U.S. on a visa until the matter is resolved. The measure affects approximately 133 people on temporary protected status.

Supporting reports

• Case update — Democratic National Committee v. Trump (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00952 — Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly issued an order modifying the consolidation order to allow the League Plaintiffs and LULAC Plaintiffs to brief the issues in this case separately from the Democratic Party Plaintiffs.
• Case update — League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) v. Executive Office of the President (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00946 — Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly issued an order modifying the consolidation order to allow the plaintiffs to rule separately.
• Case update — League of Women Voters Education Fund v. Trump (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00955 — The court sealed the case due to logistical and technical difficulties.
• Case update — Moe v. Trump (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00653 — Plaintiffs filed an amended motion for summary judgement .
• Case update — U.S. Institute of Peace v. Jackson (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00804 — Judge Mary McElroy granted Plaintiff's request for a TRO against Defendants, which required Defendants to immediately cease the withholding of funds and implementing or enforcing the funding terminations.
• Motion granted — State of Colorado v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (D.R.I.) 1:25-cv-00121 — Defendants appealed the April 4 order granting the preliminary injunction to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (Case No. 25-5105 ).
• Appeal filed — Aviel v. Gor et al (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00778 — Petitioner Mahmoud Khalil filed a reply in support of his motion for a preliminary injunction. Khalil argues the government is mistaken in its claim that the Immigration and Nationality Act prohibits judicial review of his challenge to his detention and the policy decisions that led to his detention. Khalil also seeks to rebut the government's arguments that his claims are unlikely to succeed, he has not established irreparable harm, and the balance of the equities leans in favor of the government.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Mahmoud Khalil v. William P. Joyce et al. (D.N.J.) 2:25-cv-01963 — The Defendants appealed the order, and on the morning of April 7, the Fourth Circuit denied the Defendants' request for a stay. The Defendants petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to vacate the district court order and an immediate administrative stay. Chief Justice Roberts issued a temporary stay and ordered the Plaintiff to submit a reply by 5pm ET the following day. The Plaintiff, however, submitted their reply shortly afterwards on the same day.
• Appeal filed — Abrego Garcia v. Noem (D. Md.) 8:25-cv-00951 — Plaintiffs filed an emergency motion to enforce the TRO, alleging that Defendants have not complied with the court's order.
• Case update — Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto v. United States Department of Health and Human Services (N.D. Cal.) 3:25-cv-02847 — Judge Richard Mark Gergel narrowed Plaintiffs' expedited discovery requests to a single request and ordered the five defendant agencies named in Plaintiffs' motion to produce all documents from Jan. 20, 2025 to present relating to the freeze, pause, and/or termination of any of the grants identified by Plaintiffs in their motion for expedited discovery.
• Case update — Sustainability Institute v. Trump (D.S.C.) 2:25-cv-02152 — The First Circuit denied the stay on jurisdictional grounds involving the temporary status of the district court's order. The appeals court stated that the government's issuance of intervening Guidance Regarding Third Country Removals “made a moving target of their removal policy” that “only reinforces the temporary nature of the relief at issue.”
• Motion denied — D.V.D. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (D. Mass.) 1:25-cv-10676 — Defendants filed a motion to dissolve the emergency TRO following the Supreme Court's grant of emergency relief in Department of Education v. California , 145 S. Ct. 966 (2025) (per curiam), in which the Court found the government defendants were likely to succeed in dismissing the case for lack of jurisdiction. Defendants also argued in their memorandum that the district court should stay proceedings. On April 11, Plaintiffs filed an opposition to this motion to dissolve and stay proceedings, however Judge Stearns granted Defendants' motion on April 14. The court stated that it “was “merely deferring (as it must) to the Supreme Court's unmistakable directive that, for jurisdictional purposes, the proper forum for this case is the Court of Federal Claims.”
• Motion granted — Massachusetts Fair Housing Center v. Department of Housing and Urban Development (D. Mass.) 3:25-cv-30041 — Defendants Donald Trump and Pamela Bondi filed a reply memorandum in support of their motion to dismiss, reiterating their allegations that Plaintiffs' claims lack standing and alleging failure to state a claim for relief.
• Motion to dismiss decided — Democratic National Committee v. Trump (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00587 — The FEC filed a reply to Plaintiffs' response to the FEC's motion to dismiss, reiterating their allegations that Plaintiffs' claims lack standing.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO v. Social Security Administration (D. Md.) 1:25-cv-00596 — Defendants filed their opposition to the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction and/or stay, challenging the validity of the plaintiff's standing as well as their allegations of violations of the Privacy Act or the Internal Revenue Code, ultimately refuting plaintiff's allegations of irreparable harm.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Centro de Trabajadores Unidos v. Bessent (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00677 — Defendants filed a joint motion to dismiss and opposition to Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction. Defendants argue Plaintiffs lack the jurisdictional requirements to bring a suit and that DHS can legally request tax return information relating to individuals under criminal investigation.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Chicago Women in Trades v. Trump (N.D. Ill.) 1:25-cv-02005 — Plaintiff filed a reply memorandum in support of its motion for a preliminary injunction in which it requested a nationwide preliminary injunction covering all federal agencies. In the alternative, the Plaintiff requested a preliminary injunction against the defendant agencies.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Democratic National Committee v. Trump (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00952 — Nonpartisan plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of the EO. In an accompanying memorandum , plaintiffs reassert that the EO violates Constitutional protections for federalism and the separation of powers.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) v. Executive Office of the President (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00946 — Democratic Party plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of the EO. In an accompanying memorandum , plaintiffs reassert that the EO violates Constitutional protections for federalism and the separation of powers.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — League of Women Voters Education Fund v. Trump (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00955 — Plaintiffs filed an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO) to enjoin DOE from implementing the Certification Requirement it announced on April 3 while awaiting the court's decision on Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction. DOE objected to the emergency motion on April 8.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — National Education Association v. U.S. Department of Education (D.N.H.) 1:25-cv-00091 — Plaintiffs filed a reply memorandum in support of their motion for a preliminary injunction.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Northeast Organic Farming Association of New York v. U.S. Department of Agriculture (S.D.N.Y.) 1:25-cv-01529 — Defendants filed a memorandum in opposition to the motion for a preliminary injunction. They argue that the Plaintiff lacks standing, failed to demonstrate irreparable harm, is unlikely to succeed on the merits as they raise no permissible FRA or PRA claim, and fail to establish that DOGE is an agency. They also contend that the court lacks jurisdiction to enjoin the President.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Project on Government Oversight, Inc. v. Trump (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00527 — Defendants filed oppositions to Plaintiffs' motions for preliminary injunction and to provisionally certify the classes . With regard to the opposition to the preliminary injunction, Defendants argue that the court lacks jurisdiction to consider the claims or to enter class-wide injunctions. Defendants also argue that Plaintiffs' allegations are mooted because the Border Patrol office responsible for Eastern California issued policy and guidance on April 4, 2025 regarding the need for reasonable suspicion for detentions and probable cause for warrantless arrests, and it plans to conduct training sessions in the near future.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — United Farm Workers v. Noem (E.D. Cal.) 1:25-cv-00246 — Judge Fernando Rodriguez granted a preliminary injunction and set an evidentiary hearing for May 5 on whether the petitioner is a member of TdA.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Zacarias Matos v. Venegas (S.D. Tex.) 1:25-cv-00057 — Plaintiffs filed a formal motion for summary judgment (and memorandum in support), following the court's decision to convert their Feb. 19 preliminary-injunction motion into a summary-judgment motion. They also submitted a proposed order requesting a permanent injunction to prevent the administration from enforcing Proclamation 10888
• Summary judgment ruling — Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services v. Noem (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00306 — Plaintiffs filed an Ex Parte Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause . The TRO sought would enjoin the implementation of the EO.
• Temporary restraining order ruling — American Federation Of Government Employees, AFL-CIO v. Trump (N.D. Cal.) 3:25-cv-03070 — Immediately after filing its complaint on April 7, the Plaintiff filed a motion for an emergency temporary restraining order (TRO) to temporarily block Defendants from terminating, freezing, or otherwise interfering with Maine's access to federal funds allocated to Maine based on Maine's alleged violation of Title IX. Plaintiff amended its complaint the next day, but did not add any additional claims against Defendants.
• Temporary restraining order ruling — Maine v. US Department of Agriculture (D. Me.) 1:25-cv-00131 — In a win for the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a federal appeals court blocked a lower court decision that prevented the agency from accessing people's private data at three federal agencies.
• Federal appeals court blocked lower court decision on DOGE data access — Defendants appealed the final judgment and permanent injunction to the First Circuit Court of Appeals.
• Appeal filed — Association of American Medical Colleges v. National Institutes of Health (D. Mass.) 1:25-cv-10340 — NIH appealed the final judgment and permanent injunction issued by Judge Kelley on April 4 to the First Circuit Court of Appeals.
• Appeal filed — Association of American Universities, et al. v. Department of Health and Human Services, et al. (D. Mass.) 1:25-cv-10346 — Judge Chutkan ordered the extension of the March 18 TRO for another 7 days.
• Appeal filed — Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. National Institutes of Health (D. Mass.) 1:25-cv-10338 — Judge Lamberth extended the TRO for an additional 14 days pending the presentation of a new grant agreement to RFE/RL and a status update on said grant agreement.
• Case update — Climate United Fund v. Citibank (D.D.C.) 1:24-cv-00698 — Petitioner filed an amended habeas petition .
• Case update — RFE/RL, Inc. v. Lake (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00799 — Defendants moved to dissolve the TRO in light of the Supreme Court's decision to stay a TRO in Dep't of Education v. California.
• Case update — Suri v. Trump (E.D. Va.) 1:25-cv-00480 — The U.S. Supreme Court granted a stay on the basis of standing. The Court wrote: “The District Court's injunction was based solely on the allegations of the nine non-profit-organization plaintiffs in this case. But under established law, those allegations are presently insufficient to support the organizations' standing. This order does not address the claims of the other plaintiffs, which did not form the basis of the District Court's preliminary injunction.”
• Case update — Widakuswara v. Kari Lake (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-01015 — the Plaintiffs filed a reply in the district court in support of their motion for a preliminary injunction, claiming that they are likely to succeed on the merits and that they face irreparable harm if deported to a third country without documented notice or an opportunity to present their claims before an immigration judge.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — American Federation Of Government Employees, AFL-CIO v. Office of Personnel Management and Charles Ezell (N.D. Cal.) 3:25-cv-017 — Judge Lydia Griggsby denied Plaintiffs' motion for a TRO and preliminary injunction for most plaintiffs, but held the motion in abeyance for the Immigrant Law Center of Minnesota. In the related opinion issued on April 14, Judge Griggsby found Plaintiffs had not demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of their APA claims due to a lack of jurisdiction.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — D.V.D. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (D. Mass.) 1:25-cv-10676 — Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief. Plaintiffs added an additional claim under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (alleging Defendant's public health funding decision is contrary to law) as well as claims for the violation of the Separation of Powers, Spending Clause, and an allegation that Defendants' actions are ultra vires violations. On that same day, Plaintiff States filed a motion for a preliminary injunction to block Defendants from enforcing or implementing the decision to terminate funding for Plaintiff States and their local health jurisdictions.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Solutions In Hometown Connections v. Noem (D. Md.) 8:25-cv-00885 — The court granted a preliminary injunction on First Amendment grounds.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — State of Colorado v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (D.R.I.) 1:25-cv-00121 — USDS filed an opposition to CREW's motion for expedited discovery and requested for CREW's motion to be denied or at least limited in scope. CREW replied on April 10, reiterating that it is entitled to expedited discovery in order to meaningfully respond to USDS's motion for partial summary judgment.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — The Associated Press v. Budowich (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00532 — Jenner filed its motion for summary judgment on all claims, requesting a permanent injunction against the implementation of the EO. On the same day, the Department of Justice filed its motion to dismiss.
• Summary judgment ruling — CREW v. DOGE (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00511 — Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. On the same day, Plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment.
• Summary judgment ruling — Jenner & Block v. Department of Justice (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00916 — The Defendants filed a memorandum in opposition to the Plaintiffs' motion for a Temporary Restraining Order.
• Summary judgment ruling — Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr v. Executive Office of the President (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00917 — The Supreme Court granted an administrative stay on an order from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, which had required the federal government to stop firing probationary employees en masse and to rehire those already terminated. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) had been accused of infringing on Congress' authority and violating the Administrative Procedure Act by ordering these firings. The Supreme Court's decision allows the federal government to continue its actions pending further litigation, with Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissenting.
• Temporary restraining order ruling — American Federation of Teachers v. Department of Education (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00802 — Defendants filed their opposition to Plaintiff's motion for an emergency TRO. Plaintiffs replied to Defendant's opposition on April 10.
• Supreme Court Grants Stay in Office of Personnel Management v. American Federation of Government Employees — DOE and Plaintiffs negotiated an agreement that prevents DOE from initiating enforcement action with respect to the Dear Colleague Letter and subsequent actions until after April 24. Plaintiffs' emergency motion for a TRO was declared moot the following day.
• Case update — Maine v. US Department of Agriculture (D. Me.) 1:25-cv-00131 — Plaintiff filed a motion for a further TRO “to immediately disburse to RFE/RL the amount of RFE/RL's congressionally appropriate funds” for April 2025. In a memorandum supporting the motion, Plaintiff asserts that new grant conditions by Defendants are unlawful.
• Case update — National Education Association v. U.S. Department of Education (D.N.H.) 1:25-cv-00091 — Judge Fernando Rodriguez granted petitioners' TRO on an ex parte basis and blocked Respondents from transferring, relocating, or removing petitioners "or any other person that Respondents claim are subject to removal under the Proclamation, from the El Valle Detention Center; and Respondents are enjoined from transporting such persons outside of Willacy County or Cameron County, Texas, without an Order from the Court." Absent further action, the TRO will be in place through April 23, 2025.
• Motion granted — J.A.V. v. Trump (S.D. Tex.) 1:25-cv-00072 — The Court denied the administration's motion to reconsider and stay an expedited discovery order. The court granted the motion to strike discovery from DOGE.
• Motion granted — Sustainability Institute v. Trump (D.S.C.) 2:25-cv-02152 — Plaintiffs filed another motion for an expedited preliminary injunction and stay of agency action, after ED sent state and local education agencies a Reminder of Legal Obligations Undertaken in Exchange for Receiving Federal Financial Assistance and Request for Certification under Title VI and SFFA v. Harvard (the “Certification”) on April 3.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — American Federation of Teachers v. U.S. Department of Education (D. Md.) 1:25-cv-00628 — The Fourth Circuit, in a 2-1 decision, issued a stay of Judge Bredar's April 1 preliminary injunction. The majority held that the Government is likely to succeed in showing Plaintiffs lacked standing, and noted, “[t]he Supreme Court has stayed a similar preliminary injunction issued by the United States District Court for the Northern District of California (referring to American Federation Of Government Employees, AFL-CIO v. Office of Personnel Management and Ezell ).”
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Maryland et al. v. U.S. Department of Agriculture et al. (D. Md.) 1:25-cv-00748 — MBN filed a motion for a preliminary injunction. The next day, the parties agreed to brief this case alongside Radio Free Asia v. United States .
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Middle East Broadcasting Networks v. United States (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00966 — The court granted Plaintiffs' request to withdraw their motion for a preliminary injunction.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — State of California v. U.S. Department of Education (D. Mass.) 1:25-cv-10548 — Plaintiffs and Defendants jointly filed a stipulation converting Plaintiffs' motion for a TRO to a motion for a preliminary injunction and setting a timeline for further responses to the motion.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — State of Rhode Island v. Trump (D.R.I.) 1:25-cv-00128 — Defendants filed a reply in further support of their cross motion for summary judgment, arguing that Brehm cannot succeed on the merits of his case.
• Summary judgment ruling — Brehm v. Marocco (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00660 — On the evening of April 10 the Supreme Court, in a per curiam opinion without any dissent, upheld the district court order in large part. The Court wrote: “The order properly requires the Government to ‘facilitate' Abrego Garcia's release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador. The intended scope of the term ‘effectuate' in the District Court's order is, however, unclear, and may exceed the District Court's authority.” Within hours, the district court issued an order “to DIRECT that Defendants take all available steps to facilitate the return of Abrego Garcia to the United States as soon as possible.” The order also required the government to provide a declaration with information of Abrego Garcia's current location and steps taken to facilitate his return.
• Case update — Abrego Garcia v. Noem (D. Md.) 8:25-cv-00951 — Following a hearing, the court ordered the Defendants to provide supplemental declarations to address “specific clarifications” missing from the first round of declarations.
• Case update — American Oversight v. Hegseth (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00883 — Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint , which did not include any new allegations or requests for relief but did include additional plaintiffs and facts.
• Case update — Carter v. Department of Education (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00744 — Plaintiff filed a motion to expedite discovery . Defendants filed their opposition in response to this motion on April 24, challenging the court's jurisdiction over Plaintiff's claims and asserting Plaintiff cannot meet the standard for expedited discovery because there is no emergency or preliminary relief pending or scheduled.
• Case update — Center for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Department of Interior (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00612 — The court extended the TRO until April 30.
• Case update — LeBlanc & Felten v. United States Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00542 — State Attorneys General submitted an amicus brief in support of Defendants.
• Cases consolidated — Metropolitan Transportation Authority v. Duffy (S.D.N.Y.) 1:25-cv-01413 — The court unsealed the case again with both parties agreeing that this case need not remain under seal, but rather, can proceed under the same protections as in other like cases.
• Notice of appeal filed — New Hampshire Indonesian Community Support v. Donald J. Trump (D.N.H.) 1:25-cv-00038 — Defendants filed a motion to dissolve the TRO, asserting that no party had requested the court's extension and that new grant terms had rendered the TRO moot.
• Notice of appeal filed — The Associated Press v. Budowich (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00532 — NYCDOT filed a Complaint-in-Intervention , claiming that the termination of the congestion pricing plan violates the Administrative Procedure Act as arbitrary and capricious and ultra vires as well as the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment and the National Environmental Policy Act. On April 18, this was consolidated into the Consolidated First Amended Complaint , on behalf of Plaintiffs MTA and TBTA and Intervenor-Plaintiffs NYSDOT and NYCDOT. The Consolidated First Amended Complaint included additional facts related to Secretary Duffy's alleged legal rationale for terminating the congestion pricing plan and posts on social media about ending federal funding.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — American Library Association v. Sonderling et al. (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-01050 — Defendants filed a notice of appeal of the preliminary injunction to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit (Case No. 25-1348 ).
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Chung v. Trump (S.D.N.Y.) 1:25-cv-02412 — Defendants submitted a notice of appeal to DC Circuit (Case No. 25-5109 ).
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00943 — Plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction directing Defendants to cease actions taken to dissolve the IMLS while the court considers the case. Plaintiffs also filed a memorandum in support of their motion reasserting their arguments that the administration's actions toward IMLS violate the Constitution and the APA.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Radio Free Asia v. United States (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00907 — Plaintiffs filed a reply in support of their motion for a preliminary injunction, noting that Defendants' opposition motion supports Plaintiffs' position that ICE seeks taxpayer data to locate and deport immigrants from the U.S.
• Stay motion decided — American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education v. Carter (D. Md.) 1:25-cv-00702 — Chung filed a motion to expedite discovery to support her preliminary injunction motion which, if granted, would prevent her detention and transfer.
• Appeal filed — Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto v. United States Department of Health and Human Services (N.D. Cal.) 3:25-cv-02847 — The district court denied the motion for a stay and preliminary injunction on the basis that Plaintiffs lacked standing. The court ruled that Plaintiffs lacked both organisational and associational standing.
• Case update — American Association of University Professors v. Rubio (D. Mass.) 1:25-cv-10685 — The parties agreed to convert RFA's motion for a TRO into a motion for a preliminary injunction and to brief this case alongside Middle East Broadcast Networks v. United States .
• Case update — Gunaydin v. Trump (D. Minn.) 0:25-cv-01151 — The Fourth Circuit granted the government's motion to stay the preliminary injunction upon consideration of the parties' submissions and the Supreme Court's recent order granting a stay pending appeal in Department of Education, et al. v. California, et al.
• Case update — J.A.V. v. Trump (S.D. Tex.) 1:25-cv-00072 — Defendants appealed the court's decision to grant and then extend the TRO to the Ninth Circuit.
• Case update — Jenner & Block v. Department of Justice (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00916 — State Attorneys General submitted an amicus brief in support of Plaintiffs.
• Case update — New York Immigration Coalition v. Donald J. Trump et al. (S.D.N.Y.) 1:25-cv-01309 — Günaydin filed an amended habeas petition. The government responded to this amended petition on April 14.
• Case update — Susan Webber et al v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security et al (D. Mont.) 4:25-cv-00026 — The TRO was extended through April 25, 2025.
• Motion granted — Maine v. US Department of Agriculture (D. Me.) 1:25-cv-00131 — Defendants filed a motion and a memorandum of law , seeking to stay the case because the EO at issue is subject to three nationwide injunctions.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — National Treasury Employees Union v. Russell Vought (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00381 — Plaintiff filed a motion opposing Defendants' motion to dissolve the TRO, both on the merits and because of Plaintiff's motion for a new TRO.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — San Francisco AIDS Foundation et al v. Trump (N.D. Cal.) 3:25-cv-01824 — Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint , adding Plaintiffs David and Rhonda Mountain Chief.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Somerville Public Schools v. Trump (D. Mass.) 1:25-cv-10677 — Defendants filed a cross-motion for summary judgement and to oppose Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgement. Defendants argue that because USIP does not exercise legislative or judicial functions, it necessarily must be considered to exercise executive functions, thereby making it part of the Executive Branch and making its officers removable by the President. Defendants also argue that, in any case, Plaintiffs requested relief, reinstatement, is improper and beyond the equitable authority of the courts as it would put the Judicial Branch directly at odds with the President in his exercise of his duties.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — State of New York v. McMahon (D. Mass.) 1:25-cv-10601 — Judge John Woodcock, Jr. granted Plaintiff's motion for an emergency TRO through April 25, 2025. This order requires Defendants to immediately unfreeze and release federal funding to Maine that has been withheld due to the alleged violation of Title IX and was later extended through May 9, 2025.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — State of New York v. United States Department of Education (S.D.N.Y.) 1:25-cv-02990 — Defendants filed a memorandum opposing Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction, asserting that Plaintiffs' claims are nonjusticiable and that Defendants' actions are valid exercises of agency discretion.
• Summary judgment ruling — Slaughter and Bedoya v. Trump (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00909 — Defendants filed a combined opposition to MBN and Radio Free Asia's (RFA) preliminary injunction motions, contending that the court lacks jurisdiction over RFA and MBN's claims following the Supreme Court's decision in Department of Education v. California , 145 S. Ct. 966 (2025).
• Temporary restraining order ruling — American Association of University Professors - Harvard Faculty Chapter v. Department of Justice (D. Mass.) 1:25-cv-10910 — DOE filed its objection to Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction. DOE claimed Plaintiffs lack standing and that their APA claims will fail because the Dear Colleague Letter is not a final agency action. On April 15, Plaintiffs filed a reply in support of their motion for a preliminary injunction.
• Temporary restraining order ruling — G.F.F. v. Trump (S.D.N.Y.) 1:25-cv-02886 — Following oral argument, the D.C. Circuit, in a per curiam opinion, granted the stay in part . The Circuit stayed the preliminary injunction “insofar as it prohibits defendants from terminating or issuing a notice of reduction in force to employees whom defendants have determined, after a particularized assessment, to be unnecessary to the performance of defendants' statutory duties.” The Circuit set the next oral argument for May 16, 2025.
• — Defendants filed a combined opposition to RFA and Middle East Broadcasting Network's (MBN) preliminary injunction motions, contending that the court lacks jurisdiction over RFA and MBN's claims following the Supreme Court's decision in Department of Education v. California , 145 S. Ct. 966 (2025).
• — Defendants filed their opposition to Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction. Defendants argue that Plaintiffs' claims fail on the merits and that any injunctive relief should be limited to the Plaintiffs and agency defendants.
• — Defendants filed a memorandum opposing Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction, asserting that Plaintiffs' claims lack justiciability and that Defendants' actions are valid exercises of agency discretion.
• — Defendants filed their opposition to Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction. Defendants argue that the court should deny relief because the programs identified by Plaintiffs are within the discretion of the Secretary of the ED instead of being statutorily mandated and that Plaintiffs have failed to identify how the reduction in workforce is tied to the ED's inability to perform its statutory duties.
• — Plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary injunction.
• — Plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that because there is no dispute about the facts and the governing law is clear, there is no barrier to proceeding straight to summary judgment.
• — State Attorneys General submitted an amicus brief in support of Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment.
• — Plaintiffs filed a motion for a temporary restraining order, asking the court to enjoin any further review and/or termination of Harvard's federal funding by the administration.
• — The court certified the class and granted a temporary restraining order preventing their removal from the district or the United States.

Supporting reports

• Trump administration restricts Associated Press access to official events over Gulf of Mexico naming dispute — The Trump White House restricted the Associated Press's access to official administration events in response to the news agency's rejection of the administration's renaming of the Gulf of Mexico to the "Gulf of America." This action was characterized by Obama as an unacceptable restriction on press access based on editorial disagreement.

Supporting reports

• Trump administration issues executive orders targeting law firms over representation of Trump opponents and prosecutors — The Trump administration issued executive orders against corporate law firms that either represented attorneys involved in prosecution efforts against Trump during the Biden presidency or represented the current administration's political opponents. Obama characterized this as an unprecedented use of executive power to punish legal representation based on political alignment.
• Law firms reach deals with Trump administration to avoid executive orders — Multiple prominent law firms—Willkie, Farr and Gallagher; Milbank LLP; and Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom—capitulated to Trump's executive orders by reaching deals with the White House. In exchange for avoiding the orders, the firms agreed to perform pro bono work for causes aligned with Trump and to decline race-based hiring practices. This capitulation drew criticism from law firm alumni and Senator Bernie Sanders, who characterized it as "absolute cowardice" and a betrayal of professional independence.
• Trump administration issues executive orders targeting law firms representing political rivals — President Trump issued executive orders targeting law firms that had represented his political rivals. The orders sought to revoke security clearances, ban attorneys from accessing federal buildings, and require firms doing business with the government to disclose existing client relationships. The orders threatened to cripple targeted firms. Some firms capitulated and reached deals with the White House; others, including Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, and WilmerHale, challenged the orders in court and secured injunctions or mandates blocking most of the measures.
• Trump executive orders target law firms for retribution; judges block orders on First Amendment and due process grounds — Trump issued executive orders targeting law firms Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, and WilmerHale, seeking to revoke security clearances and curtail their government business. The orders targeted firms whose lawyers led a special counsel inquiry into Russian interference in the 2016 election. Three Washington DC judges in March blocked these orders. Judge John Bates called Trump's move "disturbing" and "troubling," noting it violated the firms' and lawyers' First Amendment and due process rights. Judge Beryl Howell temporarily blocked sanctions against Perkins Coie.
• Trump signs executive order targeting Susman Godfrey law firm — President Trump signed an executive order on April 9, 2025, targeting Susman Godfrey, the law firm that represented Dominion Voting Systems in its $787.5 million defamation settlement against Fox News over 2020 election falsehoods. The order restricts the firm's attorneys from accessing government buildings, revokes security clearances, and bars the firm from representing clients with federal business. Trump stated "there were some very bad things that happened with these law firms" without clarifying his rationale. Susman Godfrey announced it would challenge the order as unconstitutional.
• Trump issued executive order targeting law firm Susman Godfrey, suspending security clearances and restricting federal contracts — President Trump issued an executive order on April 9, 2025, directing federal agencies to suspend security clearances held by Susman Godfrey LLP employees, cease provision of government materials and services to the firm, review and terminate federal contracts involving the firm, and restrict official access and hiring of Susman employees. The order alleges the firm engages in activities undermining U.S. interests, including weaponizing the legal system, funding groups that undermine military effectiveness, and administering race-based employment programs.
• White House signed Executive Order 14263 targeting law firm Susman Godfrey with security clearance suspensions, contract terminations, and personnel restrictions. — The White House issued Executive Order 14263 on April 9, 2025, directing federal agencies to suspend security clearances held by Susman Godfrey LLP employees, terminate government contracts with the firm, require contractors to disclose business relationships with Susman, restrict employee access to federal buildings, and limit hiring of Susman staff. The order characterizes the firm as engaging in "weaponization" of the legal system, undermining military effectiveness, and racial discrimination. Agencies must submit assessments of affected contracts within 30 days.
• Trump executive order targeted law firm representing Dominion — Another executive order targets a law firm that represented Dominion Voting Systems Inc. in a lawsuit against Fox Corp. that resulted in the media company agreeing to pay a $787.5 million settlement. The firm is also involved in a defamation case against Trump supporter and MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell.

Supporting reports

• DOJ lawyer placed on leave for insufficient defense of erroneous deportation — Federal DOJ attorney Erez Reuveni was placed on administrative leave by Deputy US Attorney General Todd Blanche after failing to "vigorously" defend the Trump administration's position in the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a legally resident Salvadoran immigrant erroneously deported to El Salvador. US District Judge Paula Xinis had ordered Garcia's return to Maryland, calling his detention "wholly lawless." Reuveni acknowledged an "absence of evidence" justifying the deportation. His supervisor, August Flentje, was also placed on leave. Attorney General Pam Bondi announced the action on Fox News Sunday.
• DOJ placed immigration lawyer on indefinite leave for conceding wrongful deportation — The Justice Department placed an immigration lawyer on indefinite leave after he conceded in court that the deportation of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia should not have happened. Attorney General Pam Bondi stated that DOJ attorneys are "required to zealously advocate" for the government or they will "face consequences." The administration had previously admitted it deported Abrego Garcia, a Maryland father with protected legal status, to El Salvador due to an "administrative error."
• DOJ suspends lawyer for honest testimony about wrongful deportation — The Washington Post reported that the Department of Justice suspended lawyer Erez Reuveni, who worked at DOJ for 15 years specializing in immigration cases, after he admitted in court that the agency mistakenly deported Kilmar Abrego García to a prison in El Salvador and conceded that he did not know the legal basis for the expulsion. Reuveni was placed on indefinite leave for being honest when the judge asked him questions. AG Pam Bondi issued a statement requiring "every DOJ attorney to zealously advocate on behalf of the United States" and warning that "any attorney who fails to abide by this direction will face consequences."

Supporting reports

• Georgia district attorney drops charges against woman arrested after miscarriage — Selena Maria Chandler-Scott, 24, was arrested in late March in Georgia after emergency responders found her bleeding and unconscious following a miscarriage. Police charged her with concealing the death of another person and abandonment of a dead body after a witness reported she had disposed of fetal remains. On Friday, Tift County District Attorney Patrick Warren dropped both charges, determining the fetus was non-viable at approximately 19 weeks and that no criminal law had been violated under Georgia statute.

Supporting reports

• Florida stationery company files federal lawsuit challenging Trump China tariffs — Emily Ley, founder of Simplified, a Pensacola-based stationery company, filed a federal lawsuit in Florida on Thursday against Trump and his administration, challenging the legality of a 20% tariff on Chinese imports. The lawsuit argues Trump unlawfully bypassed required procedures by invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act instead of traditional trade rules requiring detailed investigations. Ley contends the tariffs lack demonstrated necessity and will harm American small businesses, jobs, and consumers.

Supporting reports

• Stephen Miller called federal judge "Marxist" in response to deportation order — Trump's deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, responded to Judge Xinis's order by calling her a "Marxist judge" who "thinks she's president of El Salvador." The White House responded to the judge's order by stating, "We suggest the Judge contact President Bukele [of El Salvador] because we are unaware of the judge having jurisdiction or authority over the country of El Salvador."

Supporting reports

• North Carolina Court of Appeals rules to allow challenge of 65,000+ ballots in supreme court election — The North Carolina Court of Appeals issued a 2-1 ruling allowing Republican Judge Jefferson Griffin, who lost the November 2024 state supreme court election to Democrat Allison Riggs by 734 votes, to proceed with his effort to invalidate approximately 65,000 ballots. The court ordered the state board of elections to give challenged voters 15 days to prove eligibility. Griffin, who sits on the appeals court, had his case heard by three colleagues. The ruling overturned prior rejections by the state board and a superior court judge. Riggs announced she would appeal.
• North Carolina Court of Appeals ruled to invalidate 60,000 ballots in Supreme Court election — On Friday, April 4, 2025, a panel of the North Carolina Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Republican Jefferson Griffin's challenge to 60,000 ballots cast in the November 2024 Supreme Court election won by Democrat Allison Riggs by 734 votes after recounts. The court ordered all 60,000 voters be notified and given 15 business days to provide proof of identity or have their votes discarded, and threw out ballots from North Carolina voters abroad who have never lived in the state, despite a 2011 state law protecting their voting rights. The ruling threatens to disenfranchise tens of thousands of eligible voters.
• North Carolina Supreme Court orders removal of 260 ballots and invalidates overseas military ballots in state supreme court race — The North Carolina Supreme Court ruled in favor of Republican candidate Jefferson Griffin's challenge, ordering the removal of 260 ballots identified by the Griffin campaign as cast by "never residents" and invalidating overseas military ballots cast without photo ID unless voters provided proof of identity within 30 days. The rulings targeted ballots from four heavily Democratic counties and had the potential to reverse the election result, with Griffin losing by only 700 votes.

Supporting reports

• US Supreme Court allows Trump administration to freeze $65m in teacher-training grants — The US Supreme Court issued a 5-4 emergency order allowing the Trump administration to temporarily freeze $65 million in teacher-training grants supporting diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. The decision overturned a federal judge's temporary restraining order that had blocked the cuts. Eight Democratic-led states challenged the freeze, arguing it violated federal law requiring clear explanation for cancellations. The programs affected serve over 100 teacher preparation initiatives, particularly in math, science, and special education. Schools have already begun laying off staff and canceling programs due to the funding loss.
• Supreme Court Grants Stay in Department of Education v. California — The Supreme Court granted a stay of a lower court order in the case of Department of Education v. California. The case involved the Department of Education's termination of grants related to the Teacher Quality Partnership (TQP) and Supporting Effective Educator Development (SEED) programs. Eight states, led by California, challenged the terminations, arguing they violated the Administrative Procedure Act. The lower court had ordered the restoration of the grants, but the Supreme Court's decision allows the terminations to proceed pending appeal. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented.
• Supreme Court releases opinion in Department of Education v. California (24A910) — The Supreme Court released an official slip opinion in Department of Education v. California. Docket number(s): 24A910.

Supporting reports

• Obama calls for defense of democratic values against Trump agenda — Former President Barack Obama delivered a speech at Hamilton College in New York calling on Americans, universities, and law firms to resist what he characterized as threats to democratic institutions under the Trump administration. Obama specifically criticized federal funding threats to universities over student protest policies, immigration enforcement against student protesters, and executive actions targeting law firms that represented Trump opponents or prosecutors. He urged institutions to defend free speech and academic freedom even at the cost of federal funding.

Supporting reports

• Trump exempts fossil fuel products from universal tariff package — On Wednesday, President Trump announced a 10% universal tariff package that explicitly exempts many fossil fuel products, including liquefied natural gas imports, crude oil from Canada, and petrochemical materials. The exemption follows $96 million in campaign contributions from the fossil fuel industry to Trump's re-election effort. Environmental advocates characterized the carveout as evidence of Trump's prioritization of major oil donors over broader economic and climate interests, while the American Petroleum Institute publicly welcomed the decision.

Supporting reports

• Social Security Administration canceled Maine contracts for newborn Social Security number applications. — Acting Social Security Administration Commissioner Leland Dudek canceled contracts permitting Maine parents to apply for Social Security numbers for newborns from hospitals and for Maine families to report deaths from funeral homes. The action was taken in retaliation after Maine Governor Janet Mills stated the state would follow state and federal law rather than comply with Trump's demands. When informed the change would risk identity theft and wasteful spending, Dudek directed the agency to proceed anyway. After public outcry, Dudek backtracked on the decision.

Supporting reports

• Stock markets experienced their largest decline since the 2020 coronavirus pandemic. — On April 3, 2025, U.S. stock markets fell sharply in response to Trump's tariff announcement. The Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 1,679 points, representing approximately 4% decline—its largest fall since the coronavirus pandemic in 2020. The S&P 500 fell 274 points (4.8%), and the Nasdaq Composite fell more than 1,050 points (nearly 6%). The combined losses wiped out approximately $2 trillion in market value. Global markets also plunged in response to the tariff announcement.
• President Trump announced sweeping tariffs on nearly all U.S. trading partners — On April 2nd, 2025, President Trump announced sweeping tariffs on nearly all U.S. trading partners. Markets responded dramatically with the Dow Jones falling over 4,000 points in two days—the largest two-day loss in history—marking the worst week for stocks since June 2020. Over $6.6 trillion in market value disappeared in 48 hours.
• Trump announces sweeping tariff increases on imports from nearly all nations — On April 2, 2025, President Trump announced punitive tariffs affecting nearly every nation, including 46% on Vietnamese goods, 34% on Chinese goods, 24% on Japanese goods, and 20% on EU goods, raising the average U.S. tariff rate from 2.5% to approximately 22.5%. The tariffs, described as the largest tax increase in over 50 years, caused publicly traded companies to lose $6.6 trillion in market value within two days, shifting economic outlook from sustained growth to recession. Trump invoked the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs unilaterally, a use of the law unprecedented in its 50-year history.
• Sky News reported on anomalous tariff applications — Sky News reported that the tariff policy applied duties to territories with no meaningful trade or human populations, including Heard and McDonald Islands (inhabited only by penguins and seals, facing 10% tariff), Norfolk Island (29% tariff despite no exports), Tokelau (10% tariff, population 1,600), and Cocos Islands (10% tariff, population 600). The report also noted that Lesotho, the 22nd poorest country in the world, faced the highest tariff at 50%, Cambodia faced 49% despite being the U.S.'s largest single-country export destination, and Madagascar, the 9th poorest country, faced 47% tariffs.
• U.S. stock market declined significantly — The U.S. stock market experienced substantial losses on the day the tariff policy was announced: the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 1,679 points (3.98%), the NASDAQ fell 1,050 points (5.97%), and Tesla fell 15.48 points (5.47%). Senator Angus King reported that investors lost approximately $2.5 trillion during a single committee hearing hour. Fox News removed the stock market ticker from its screen for the first time in network history.
• Trump administration implements sweeping tariffs; stock markets decline sharply — Trump announced "Liberation Day" tariffs on imports, triggering major market declines: the Dow fell 2,231 points (5.50%), NASDAQ fell 962 points (5.82%), and Tesla fell 10.42%. China responded with retaliatory tariffs of 34% on US imports, restrictions on rare earth exports, an anti-dumping probe on medical equipment, a halt to poultry imports, and designation of 11 US defense companies as "unreliable entities." Economic analysts warned of recession risk and severe consumer price increases, particularly on iPhones (potentially rising to $3,200). Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell announced no rate cuts for at least one month due to policy volatility.

Supporting reports

• Billionaires invested record $2.6bn in 2024 federal election cycle — Americans for Tax Fairness released an analysis showing that 100 extremely wealthy families invested $2.6 billion during the 2024 federal election cycle, more than double the amount from four years prior. The report found 70% of funds from top billionaire donors went to Republicans. Elon Musk's Super PAC alone spent roughly $200 million to support Trump's second term. Silicon Valley executives collectively added over $194 million. Linda McMahon (now education secretary) gave $25 million; commerce secretary Howard Lutnick contributed over $21 million. Billionaire spending in key Senate races constituted roughly half of expenditures in Montana, Pennsylvania, and Ohio.

Supporting reports

• NIH grant cancellations challenged in lawsuit over alleged ideological purge — Public health experts and labor organizations filed a lawsuit on April 2, 2025, alleging the National Institutes of Health canceled hundreds of grants since February 2025 based on ideological criteria rather than scientific merit. The complaint claims over $2.4 billion in grants were purged, including research on DEI, vaccine hesitancy, COVID-19, and international collaborations. Plaintiffs argue the cancellations violated standard peer-review processes and caused waste of taxpayer funds and completed research.

Supporting reports

• Trump declares national emergency to justify tariff authority — Trump declared a national emergency under the National Emergencies Act to justify imposing tariffs, citing the need to "increase our competitive edge, protect our sovereignty, and strengthen our national and economic security." This invocation of emergency powers allows him to bypass the constitutional requirement that Congress hold the power to impose tariffs. The declaration relies on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to grant the president tariff authority during a declared emergency.
• Trump signed Executive Order 14257 imposing reciprocal tariffs on all imports, starting at 10 percent globally and escalating to country-specific rates on April 9, 2025, citing trade deficits as a national emergency. — President Trump signed Executive Order 14257 on April 2, 2025, declaring a national emergency based on persistent U.S. goods trade deficits and invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and National Emergencies Act. The order imposes an initial 10 percent ad valorem duty on all imports effective April 5, 2025, escalating to country-specific rates (detailed in Annex I) on April 9, 2025, for designated trading partners. Exemptions include certain steel, aluminum, automobiles, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, and critical minerals. The order authorizes the Secretary of Commerce and U.S. Trade Representative to modify duties based on trading partner retaliation or compliance with reciprocal trade alignment.
• Trump announces 10% universal tariff with higher rates on 60 countries — President Trump announced a 10% tariff on all U.S. imports, with higher rates on approximately 60 countries including China, Japan, Vietnam, South Korea, and the European Union. He made the announcement in a Rose Garden speech after stock market close. The announcement caused immediate market turmoil: Dow Jones futures fell over 1,000 points (2.5%) and S&P 500 futures dropped 3.6%. Trump framed the tariffs as addressing decades of unfair trade practices and promised they would create "the golden age of America."
• Trump signs reciprocal tariff executive order imposing 10% baseline duty on all imports — President Donald Trump signed Executive Order 14206 on April 2, 2025, declaring a national emergency based on persistent U.S. goods trade deficits and imposing a 10% ad valorem duty on all imports effective April 5, 2025, with country-specific rates (ranging up to 60% for certain trading partners) taking effect April 9, 2025. The order cites the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and invokes national security and economic grounds, targeting what Trump characterizes as non-reciprocal trade practices, tariff asymmetries, and non-tariff barriers by trading partners.
• Trump signed Executive Order 14257 imposing reciprocal tariffs on all imports — President Trump signed Executive Order 14257 on April 2, 2025, declaring a national emergency based on persistent U.S. goods trade deficits and imposing reciprocal tariffs. The order establishes a 10 percent baseline ad valorem duty on all imports effective April 5, 2025, with country-specific higher rates for designated trading partners effective April 9, 2025, as detailed in Annex I. The order exempts certain goods including steel, aluminum, automobiles, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, and energy products, and includes carve-outs for USMCA-qualifying goods from Canada and Mexico. The order invokes the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and National Emergencies Act, citing trade deficits as a threat to national security and manufacturing capacity.
• Trump announces reciprocal tariff plan using simplified trade-deficit formula — President Trump announced a sweeping tariff plan calculated by dividing each country's 2024 goods trade deficit by total imports, then halving the result, with a 10% baseline for countries without large deficits. The White House confirmed the approach was simplistic, based solely on bilateral trade imbalances rather than the promised multi-factor analysis of tariff and non-tariff barriers. Economists criticized the methodology as economically flawed and strategically incoherent, with rates reaching 50% for Lesotho and 49% for Cambodia—countries with low purchasing power, not discriminatory trade practices.
• Trump administration implemented tariffs using an undocumented formula without standard economic methodology. — Trump's tariff policy applied tariffs to entire nations rather than specific products, using a formula that economists identified as nonsensical and potentially AI-generated. Economist Paul Krugman identified the formula as likely AI-derived. CNBC's Steve Liesman stated that "nobody ever heard of this formula" and concluded "the president kind of made this up as he went along." Former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers characterized the approach as "to economics what creationism is to biology, astrology is to astronomy, or RFK thought is to vaccine science." The administration provided no coherent policy rationale or analysis supporting the tariff structure.
• Trump declares national tariff emergency and claims foreign trade practices constitute national emergency — In April 2025, Trump declared a national emergency, asserting that "foreign trade and economic practices have created a national emergency" to justify sweeping tariffs. Two courts rejected this claim, though an appeals court temporarily halted the more expansive ruling. The administration bypassed Congress and normal legislative procedures to impose tariffs unilaterally under emergency authority.
• Trump announced universal tariffs on all countries — Trump stated that tariffs he will announce on Wednesday will apply to all countries, not just 10-15 specific nations previously mentioned. When asked whether tariff rates would be universal or differentiated by country, Trump declined to specify, saying "you're gonna see in two days."

Supporting reports

• Secretary of Agriculture froze federal funds for Maine educational programs. — Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins announced a freeze on federal funds for Maine educational programs. The action was taken in retaliation against Maine Governor Janet Mills for refusing to comply with Trump administration demands. Rollins stated the administration would stand against "a leftist social agenda," framing the funding freeze as ideological punishment for the state's resistance to federal directives.

Supporting reports

• Revocation of Student Visas for Protesting — Secretary of State Marco Rubio revoked the visas of 300 students who protested in support of Palestine, including two students from NC State University. This action raises concerns about the suppression of free speech and the use of visa revocation as a tool to silence dissent.
• Secretary of State Marco Rubio revoked visas of 300 students who protested in support of Palestine — Secretary of State Marco Rubio revoked the visas of 300 students, including two at NC State University, who had protested in support of Palestine. The article identifies this as an example of visa revocation targeting political protest activity.

Supporting reports

• ICE deported three US citizen children, including one with cancer, to Honduras without due process — A lawsuit filed in Louisiana federal court alleges that US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) unlawfully deported two families to Honduras in April 2025, including three US citizen children—a four-year-old boy with stage 4 kidney cancer, his seven-year-old sister, and a two-year-old girl. The suit claims ICE violated federal law and its own policies by secretly detaining the families, denying access to counsel, ignoring legal filings, and deporting them without meaningful due process. The mothers allege they were coerced into taking their children and denied the ability to arrange alternative care.
• Removal of US citizen children with deported mothers — Three US citizen children (ages seven, four, and two) were removed from the US in late April when their mothers were deported to Honduras. DHS stated the women chose to take their children with them, but one of their lawyers told the Guardian the mothers were denied any opportunity to coordinate care and custody of their children before being put on deportation flights from Louisiana. A federal judge ruled it was "illegal and unconstitutional" to remove a US citizen "with no meaningful process."

Supporting reports

• USCIS announces surveillance of immigrants' social media for antisemitic activity — In April 2025, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced that it would begin surveilling immigrants' social media activity for "antisemitic activity." According to an ICE statement that cited multiple of Trump's executive orders, the policy could affect people "applying for lawful permanent resident status, foreign students and [immigrants] affiliated with educational institutions." The Trump administration has frequently equated pro-Palestine statements and protests with antisemitism, and this policy could result in students who post statements in support of Palestine having their visas revoked.

Supporting reports

• Attorney detained at Detroit airport for representing pro-Palestine protester — In April 2025, an attorney was detained by immigration officials at Detroit Metro Airport. Amir Makled, who is a U.S. citizen, was eventually released after showing immigration agents his phone contact list. Makled believes that he was targeted for representing a student who participated in pro-Palestine protests.

Supporting reports

• House Republicans advance Save Act bill requiring documentary proof of citizenship for voter registration — House Republicans are preparing to vote on the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (Save) Act, which would require documentary proof of citizenship for voter registration, eliminate online and mail registration, mandate voter roll purges based on incomplete data, and impose criminal penalties on election officials who register people without required documentation. The bill targets a nonexistent problem—there is no evidence noncitizens are voting in meaningful numbers—and would disenfranchise millions of eligible voters, including naturalized citizens, young voters, people who changed names after marriage, and tribal residents. Election officials from both parties have warned implementation would be costly, difficult, and potentially ineffective.

Supporting reports

• Trump administration pauses SEC crypto fraud cases and closes DOJ enforcement team — The Trump administration has paused or ended 12 cryptocurrency fraud cases at the SEC, including three cases against Justin Sun's crypto companies that were charged with fraud in 2023 and paused in February 2025. Additionally, a DOJ memo in April 2025 announced closure of the national cryptocurrency enforcement team established in 2022, which had prosecuted major crypto cases against North Korean hackers and other criminals. The memo cited a pro-crypto Trump executive order from January 2025 as the driver of this policy shift.