Trump Action Archive

Supporting reports

• Trump administration fires immigration judges who blocked deportations — The Trump administration abruptly fired two immigration judges appointed by the Biden administration in 2024 who were approaching the end of their probationary terms. Both judges—who had granted asylum at higher rates than peers—had blocked deportations of Tufts University student Rümeysa Öztürk and Columbia University student Mohsen Mahdawi. The firings were reported by the New York Times on April 11.
• Department of Justice terminates six immigration judges, including two who ruled against deportations of pro-Palestinian students — The Department of Justice terminated six immigration judges, including Roopal Patel and Nina Froes, who had ruled against the Trump administration in deportation cases involving pro-Palestinian university students Rümeysa Öztürk and Mohsen Mahdawi. Both judges were Biden appointees with prior immigration defense experience. Patel rejected deportation grounds against Öztürk; Froes blocked removal of Mahdawi. The administration stated judges are evaluated on conduct, impartiality, and performance, but NPR analysis found the Trump administration appears to target judges with immigrant representation backgrounds.

Supporting reports

• Lower federal courts issue rulings blocking Trump administration policies on immigration, tariffs, and DOJ prosecutions — Since Trump's second term began, district court judges nationwide have issued sharply critical rulings challenging the legality of administration policies on immigration, tariffs, and DOJ prosecutions of political opponents. A Just Security study found over 210 cases since early 2025 where courts ruled against administration conduct, including 34 instances of non-compliance with court orders, 90 cases of judicial distrust in government representations, and 91 findings of arbitrary and capricious administrative action. Trump has responded with escalating attacks on judges, calling them "crooked" and "lunatic," and urging House Republicans to pass legislation "cracking down on rogue judges."

Supporting reports

• Trump administration argues before Supreme Court to overturn birthright citizenship via executive order — The US Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Wednesday regarding Trump's February 2025 executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship by reinterpreting the 14th Amendment's citizenship clause. Solicitor General John Sauer argued that "domicile" (permanent residence) should be required for citizenship, excluding children born to undocumented or temporarily present parents. A majority of justices appeared skeptical of the government's position. The case challenges 125+ years of precedent established in United States v. Wong Kim Ark. A decision is expected in summer 2026.
• Trump’s Executive Order on Citizenship — On January 20, 2025, President Trump issued an executive order titled “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,” which asserts that individuals born in the U.S. are not citizens if their parents do not have legal permanent status. This order contradicts the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of birthright citizenship.
• ACLU Represents Families Against Trump’s Order — The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is representing three families in a lawsuit against the Trump administration's executive order that seeks to end birthright citizenship. The case, Trump v. Barbara, includes an asylum applicant from Honduras whose child is due after the order's implementation.
• President Trump Attends Supreme Court Oral Arguments — On April 1, 2026, President Donald J. Trump attended oral arguments at the United States Supreme Court for the case Trump v. Barbara, which seeks to end birthright citizenship as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. This marked the first time a sitting president has attended such proceedings. The case stems from Trump's executive order issued on January 20, 2025, which declared that individuals born in the U.S. are not citizens if their parents lack legal permanent status. The ACLU represents families challenging this order.

Supporting reports

• Pam Bondi fired as Attorney General; Todd Blanche assumes interim role — President Trump fired Attorney General Pam Bondi on April 1, 2026, shortly before delivering a primetime address on the Iran war. Trump announced her departure via Truth Social, stating she would transition to the private sector. According to reporting, Trump cited Bondi's alleged intervention in matters related to Rep. Eric Swalwell and FBI investigative documents concerning Swalwell's relationship with Christine Fang as a reason for the dismissal. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche was named interim AG. Bondi reportedly pleaded for more time but Trump remained firm.
• Trump fires Attorney General Pam Bondi; Todd Blanche becomes acting AG and affirms Trump's "right" to direct DOJ investigations — Donald Trump fired Attorney General Pam Bondi on April 2, 2026, after months of pressure to prosecute political rivals including James Comey, Letitia James, and Adam Schiff. Though the DOJ secured indictments against Comey and James, the cases collapsed. Trump was reportedly angered by the department's lack of progress in pursuing enemies. Todd Blanche, the acting attorney general, subsequently stated Trump has the "right" to direct investigations at the justice department, signaling the administration's intent to weaponize law enforcement for political retribution.
• Trump dismisses Attorney General Pam Bondi — President Trump announced on 2 April via Truth Social that Attorney General Pam Bondi was being removed from office. Trump cited her transition to "a much needed and important new job in the private sector" without explicitly naming the Epstein files as the reason, though reporting indicates her mishandling of the Epstein investigation and repeated missed disclosure deadlines under the Epstein Files Transparency Act (EFTA) were a primary motivation for her ouster. Todd Blanche assumed the role of acting attorney general.
• Trump fires attorney general Pam Bondi — Donald Trump dismissed Pam Bondi as US attorney general after 14 months, citing frustration with her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files and her failure to prosecute additional political enemies to his satisfaction. Bondi had reshaped the Justice Department through staff purges, shifted prosecutorial focus toward immigration, and complied with Trump's demands to indict former FBI director James Comey and New York attorney general Letitia James. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche assumed acting leadership; Lee Zeldin is reportedly a top contender for permanent replacement.
• Trump fired Attorney General Pam Bondi via social media — President Trump fired Attorney General Pam Bondi by posting her dismissal on social media. Trump was reportedly angry that Bondi had not adequately punished his political enemies and that her handling of the Epstein files had failed to contain the story. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, Trump's former personal lawyer, will serve as her replacement.
• Pam Bondi fired as Attorney General — President Trump terminated Pam Bondi as Attorney General on April 2, 2026. According to reporting, Bondi reportedly pleaded with Trump not to fire her during a confrontation at the White House. Trump released a statement describing her as a "Great American Patriot" transitioning to the private sector. Todd Blanche, Trump's former personal attorney and current Deputy Attorney General, assumed the role of Acting Attorney General. Bondi remains subject to a bipartisan congressional subpoena to testify before the Oversight Committee regarding the Epstein files.
• Trump appoints Todd Blanche as acting Attorney General — Trump appointed Deputy AG Todd Blanche, his former criminal defense attorney, to replace fired Attorney General Pam Bondi in an acting capacity on April 2. Blanche's appointment places a personal loyalist with no prior DOJ leadership experience in control of the nation's chief law enforcement agency, raising concerns about politicization of the Justice Department.
• Trump fires Attorney General Pam Bondi — Trump fired Attorney General Pam Bondi on April 2 after she failed to prosecute Trump's perceived political enemies and mishandled the release of the Epstein files. CNN reported that Bondi's upcoming deposition about the Epstein files influenced the timing of her firing, as the White House sought to avoid it. Trump appointed Deputy AG Todd Blanche, his former criminal defense attorney, to replace Bondi in an acting capacity. Bondi is the second woman in Trump's Cabinet to be fired.

Supporting reports

• US judge halts Trump's $400m White House ballroom project via preliminary injunction — US District Judge Richard Leon granted a preliminary injunction requested by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, halting construction of a $400 million White House ballroom project. Trump had demolished the historic East Wing without congressional approval. Leon ruled that Trump exceeded his authority and must obtain congressional authorization before continuing. The Trump administration immediately appealed the order. Trump attacked both the nonprofit and the judge on Truth Social, claiming the project was "under budget, ahead of schedule" and required no congressional approval.
• Department of Justice appealed Judge Leon's ballroom ruling — Following Judge Richard Leon's ruling that Trump cannot proceed with White House ballroom construction without congressional approval, the Department of Justice filed an appeal of the decision.
• Judge Richard Leon blocked Trump's White House ballroom construction project — U.S. District Judge Richard Leon of the District of Columbia ruled that Trump cannot proceed with construction of a giant ballroom on the site of the demolished East Wing of the White House without congressional approval. The National Trust for Historic Preservation had sued Trump and federal agencies to halt construction, alleging Trump bypassed required legal reviews and approvals. Leon wrote that "The President of the United States is the steward of the White House for future generations of First Families. He is not, however, the owner!" and stated that "no statute comes close to giving the President the authority he claims." Leon ordered that "the ballroom construction project must stop until Congress authorizes its completion." The Department of Justice immediately appealed.
• Appeal filed — National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States v. National Park Service (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-04316 — The government appealed to the court's March 31 order to the D.C. Circuit, Case No. 26-5101 .
• Preliminary injunction ruling — National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States v. National Park Service (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-04316 — In an opinion and order , Judge Leon granteda preliminary injunction stopping the planned White House ballroom project, finding the President is acting without statutory authority. “[U]nless and until Congress blesses this project through statutory authorization, construction has to stop!,” the judge wrote. The court stayed its order for 14 days.
• US District Judge Richard Leon halted construction of Trump's ballroom project — US District Judge Richard Leon issued a preliminary injunction halting construction of Trump's ballroom, ruling that the National Trust for Historic Preservation was likely to succeed on the merits of its claim that the President lacks statutory authority for the project. The judge found no statute grants the President the claimed authority and ordered construction to stop until Congress authorizes completion. Trump responded with a lengthy Truth Social post attacking the National Trust and comparing the ballroom to other federal projects.
• NCPC approves Trump White House ballroom project despite pending judicial review — The National Capital Planning Commission, chaired by Trump's former personal lawyer William Scharf, approved Trump's $400 million East Wing ballroom project on Thursday. The approval came two days after a federal judge ruled that work cannot proceed without congressional approval and granted a preliminary injunction to the National Trust for Historic Preservation. The Justice Department has appealed the judge's ruling. The commission described the 90,000 sq ft ballroom as a continuation of the White House's historical evolution.
• Stay pending appeal decided — National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States v. National Park Service (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-04316 — The administration filed an emergency motion for a stay pending appeal of the District Court's March 31 preliminary injunction. In the alternative, the administration requested “at least” a 14-day stay so the Solicitor General could seek emergency relief from the Supreme Court. Per the motion, the East Wing is actively under construction and the building materials onsite must be installed rather than “be exposed to the conditions and elements of an open construction site. Time is of the essence!”

Supporting reports

• Trump attacked the Supreme Court on birthright citizenship case — Trump publicly attacked the Supreme Court, calling it "stupid" and "dumb" as he attempted to pre-spin a potential and likely loss in a case on birthright citizenship. The attack on the judiciary reflects contempt for the court and an attempt to delegitimize an unfavorable ruling before it is issued.
• Trump posted criticism of Supreme Court justices ahead of birthright citizenship oral arguments — Two days before Trump administration lawyers were scheduled to argue the birthright citizenship case before SCOTUS, Trump posted on social media that the justices are "dumb," stating: "Birthright Citizenship is not about rich people from China, and the rest of the World, who want their children, FOR PAY, to ridiculously become citizens of the US. It is about the BABIES OF SLAVES! The World is laughing at how STUPID our US Court System has become (TARIFFS!). Dumb Judges and Justices will not a great Country make!"

Supporting reports

• Complaint filed — Newhouse v. U.S. Agency for Global Media (D.D.C. 1:26-cv-00980) — VOA journalists and advocacy organizations filed suit in D.D.C. challenging the administration's dismantling of Voice of America's editorial independence following Executive Order 14238. The complaint alleges that defendants Michael Rigas and Kari Lake, acting for the administration, violated the statutory "Firewall" protecting VOA from political interference by censoring coverage of Iranian protests and forcing the Mandarin Service to publish White House talking points as news. Plaintiffs seek a permanent injunction to restore the Firewall, a declaration of constitutional violations, and a writ of mandamus to compel USAGM to fulfill its statutory duty to provide accurate, independent news coverage.

Supporting reports

• CREW files FOIA complaint against DHS over surveillance of immigration-enforcement protesters — Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) filed a Freedom of Information Act complaint in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against the Department of Homeland Security, seeking records of DHS tracking and surveillance of protesters opposing expanded immigration enforcement. CREW's February 2026 FOIA requests sought memoranda, policies, and database records related to DHS collection of images, license plates, and personal data on protesters during operations including "Operation Metro Surge" in Minnesota and "Operation Catch of the Day" in Maine. CREW alleges DHS failed to timely process requests, grant expedited processing, or produce responsive records, and seeks declaratory relief, injunctions compelling disclosure, and attorney fees.

Supporting reports

• Chief Justice John Roberts warns that attacks on judges are "dangerous" and "have got to stop" — On March 17, 2026, Chief Justice John Roberts, in remarks at Rice University, warned that growing verbal attacks on judges are "dangerous, and have got to stop." Roberts' comments came shortly after Trump's attacks on Judge Boasberg and within weeks of Trump's attacks on Supreme Court justices who voted against his tariff policies. Multiple reports indicate that threats of violence against judges have risen significantly in the past year.
• Chief Justice Roberts publicly rebukes Trump's personal attacks on judges — Chief Justice John Roberts delivered remarks at Rice University calling hostility directed at judges "dangerous" and stating it "has got to stop." Though Roberts did not name Trump, the statement responded to Trump's recent social media attacks on federal judges, including Judge James Boasberg, whom Trump called "corrupt" and demanded be removed and disciplined. Roberts distinguished between legitimate criticism of judicial decisions and personally directed attacks, emphasizing that judges work hard to get decisions right and that personal hostility undermines judicial independence.

Supporting reports

• Judge James Boasberg quashes grand jury subpoena for Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell — U.S. District Judge James Boasberg issued a 37-page ruling on March 13, 2026, quashing a grand jury subpoena for Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell. Boasberg found "abundant evidence that the subpoenas' dominant (if not sole) purpose is to harass and pressure Powell either to yield to the president or to resign and make way for a Fed chair who will." The judge noted the government offered no evidence that Powell committed any crime "other than displeasing the president." Trump had been waging a public campaign against Powell to lower interest rates faster and attacked Boasberg on Truth Social following the ruling.

Supporting reports

• Federal judge rules three New Jersey prosecutors appointed by Pam Bondi were illegally installed without Senate confirmation — Federal judge Matthew Brann ruled that three prosecutors handpicked by US Attorney General Pam Bondi to lead New Jersey's attorney general office were illegally appointed, repeating the same constitutional violation that disqualified Alina Habba in December 2025. Bondi had split the position into three roles (Jordan Fox, Ari Fontecchio, Philip Lamparello) to circumvent Senate confirmation requirements. Judge Brann found no legal authority for this maneuver and warned that continued reliance on unconfirmed leadership could result in dismissal of pending criminal cases.

Supporting reports

• Federal judge voided actions taken by Kari Lake at Voice of America — U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth ruled on Saturday that Kari Lake, a Trump-appointed official, lacked lawful authority to serve as acting CEO of the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM), which oversees Voice of America. Lake had exercised approximately 95 percent of the CEO's duties despite not being employed by USAGM when the former CEO resigned in January 2025 and lacking Senate confirmation. The court voided her actions, including layoffs of over 1,000 journalists and staffers, funding cuts, and restructuring that reduced VOA broadcasting from 49 languages to four. The ruling reaffirms that administrations must follow legal procedures when installing control over public institutions.
• Appeals court voids Kari Lake's tenure as head of US Agency for Global Media for lack of Senate confirmation — Senior judge Royce C Lamberth of the US District Court for the District of Columbia voided the tenure of Kari Lake, a Republican former gubernatorial candidate, who unlawfully led the US Agency for Global Media for several months in 2025 without Senate confirmation. The court voided mass layoffs and other actions Lake took to dismantle the agency overseeing Voice of America and related international news broadcasters, finding her appointment violated constitutional requirements.
• Federal judge voids Kari Lake's unlawful tenure at USAGM, invalidating mass layoffs — US District Judge Royce C. Lamberth ruled that Kari Lake unlawfully served as head of the US Agency for Global Media (USAGM), the parent agency of Voice of America, after Trump appointed her without Senate confirmation on 31 July 2025. During her tenure through 19 November 2025, Lake cut over 1,000 staff positions and terminated contracts. The judge voided all actions taken during her unlawful service, citing violations of the Appointments Clause and the Vacancies Act. The ruling relied on precedent from the Third Circuit's invalidation of Alina Habba's appointment to lead the US attorney's office in New Jersey.
• Federal judge ruled Kari Lake acted unlawfully in running Voice of America — U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth ruled that Kari Lake, head of the U.S. Agency for Global Media, acted unlawfully in running the Voice of America and its parent agency. The judge declared all of Lake's actions over the past year null and void, including the layoffs of more than 1,000 journalists and staffers. Lake announced she would appeal the ruling.
• Federal judge voided Kari Lake's authority over Voice of America — A federal judge ruled that Kari Lake had been unlawfully running Voice of America without proper legal authority and voided her actions. Lake had previously laid off more than 1,000 journalists and reduced Voice of America's language broadcasts from 49 to four. The ruling invalidated these personnel and operational decisions made without lawful authorization to hold the position.

Supporting reports

• Supreme Court rules Trump exceeded authority on tariff imposition — The U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling that President Trump violated the Constitution by using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose sweeping tariffs on global imports without congressional approval. Chief Justice John Roberts stated that taxation is a core congressional power. The ruling invalidated most of the administration's tariffs. Democratic lawmakers celebrated the decision as a check on executive overreach, while Trump called it a "disgrace" and indicated he had a backup plan.
• Supreme Court rules Trump tariffs unconstitutional in 6-3 decision — The US Supreme Court ruled 6-3 last Friday that President Trump exceeded his constitutional authority by imposing tariffs using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) during peacetime. The court affirmed that Congress alone retains the power to levy taxes under the Constitution and that the IEEPA cannot supersede that authority absent genuine emergency conditions. The ruling marked the first time the Supreme Court overturned Trump policies in his second term and undercut his claims to sweeping executive trade authority.
• Supreme Court rules Trump's tariffs unlawful, striking down invocation of International Emergency Economic Powers Act — The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6–3 that President Trump lacked authority to impose sweeping global tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Chief Justice John Roberts authored the majority opinion, joined by two Trump-appointed justices (Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett) and the three liberal-leaning justices. The court held that taxation powers are reserved exclusively to Congress. Trump responded with a vitriolic public attack on the justices, calling them "FOOLS" and "LAPDOGS," and immediately announced new tariffs under different legislative authority.
• Supreme Court strikes down Trump's national emergency tariffs — The U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-3 decision invalidating Trump's tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), ruling that tariffs constitute taxation and fall under Congress's exclusive constitutional authority. The decision reduces the U.S. average trade-weighted tariff from 15.3% to 8.3%, with significant reductions on Chinese (36.8% to 21.2%), Brazilian (26.3% to 6.8%), and Japanese (14.9% to 9.9%) imports. Trump immediately announced a 10% blanket global tariff under Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act as an alternative.
• US Supreme Court declares Trump's IEEPA tariffs illegal — The US Supreme Court ruled that President Trump cannot impose tariffs in peacetime using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), declaring his tariffs enacted under that authority unlawful. The White House indicated it will replace the levies using alternative statutory tools, such as the 1974 Trade Act. International businesses and governments expressed uncertainty about future tariff regimes, as the ruling does not constrain Trump's other trade policy options. US business groups celebrated the decision as affirming rule of law and separation of powers.
• US Supreme Court rules Trump's tariffs illegal under IEEPA, Trump announces new 10% global tariff under Section 122 — The US Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling on Friday declaring that Donald Trump's tariffs lacked legal justification under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a 1977 law designed for national emergencies. The court held that tariff authority belongs exclusively to Congress under the Constitution's taxing power. Trump responded by calling the justices "a disgrace to the nation" and immediately announced a new 10% global baseline tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which permits 150-day tariffs, while initiating investigations into unfair trading practices for potential permanent tariffs.
• US Supreme Court strikes down Trump's unilateral tariff authority under IEEPA — The US Supreme Court ruled 6–3 that President Trump exceeded his constitutional authority by imposing global tariffs without congressional approval under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The decision affirmed lower court findings that the tariffs—covering dozens of countries and announced on "liberation day" in April 2025—were illegal. Trump immediately vowed to continue tariffs using alternative authority under the Trade Act of 1974, announcing a new 10% global tariff and directing investigations into unfair trading practices.
• Supreme Court ruled Trump's tariffs under IEEPA unconstitutional — The U.S. Supreme Court found that tariffs Trump levied under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) are unconstitutional. The decision was announced on Friday, February 21, 2026. Following the ruling, Trump announced a 10% tariff on foreign imports on Friday and escalated to a 15% worldwide tariff on Saturday, claiming the court decision actually granted him broader powers than he previously possessed.
• Supreme Court ruling on tariffs declared unconstitutional — The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the tariffs imposed by Trump under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) are unconstitutional. Following this decision, Trump announced a 10% tariff on foreign imports, which he later raised to 15%. He claimed that the ruling inadvertently granted him more power and threatened higher tariffs on countries he accused of taking advantage of the U.S. This ruling has led to significant uncertainty among U.S. trading partners, prompting the European Parliament to pause trade deal approvals with the U.S.
• Trump claims he has unchecked power after Supreme Court ruling — Trump publicly stated that the Supreme Court's ruling has given him "far more powers and strength" than before, suggesting he could use tariffs in a more aggressive manner. His comments reflect a disregard for the Court's authority and the principles of checks and balances.
• Trump’s tariffs face public disapproval — A poll indicated that 64% of Americans disapprove of Trump's handling of tariffs, with 82% believing he must obey Supreme Court rulings. This public sentiment reflects widespread dissatisfaction with his economic policies and governance.
• Supreme Court strikes down Trump "liberation day" tariffs — The US Supreme Court struck down Trump's sweeping "liberation day" tariffs that had been imposed the previous year. The decision represented a judicial check on the executive's tariff authority and prompted the administration to announce the alternative 10% global tariff as a replacement policy.
• Supreme Court struck down Trump's broad tariff authority under IEEPA — Days before the State of the Union address, the Supreme Court struck down the President's claimed authority to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), in what CNBC and CNN reported as one of the most consequential executive power rulings in years. In response, Trump called the ruling "unfortunate" and vowed to pursue "alternative" legal authorities to continue imposing tariffs without congressional approval, signaling his intent to circumvent the Court's decision.

Supporting reports

• Trump attacks Supreme Court justices by name and threatens future retaliation — During a White House press briefing on February 21, 2026, Trump publicly denounced six Supreme Court justices who voted against his tariff authority, calling them a "disgrace to the nation" and "unpatriotic." He praised the three dissenters (Kavanaugh, Thomas, Alito) and attacked two of his own appointees, Barrett and Gorsuch, describing them as "an embarrassment to their families" and suggesting they would be excluded from the State of the Union. Trump alleged without evidence that the court had been "swayed by foreign interests."

Supporting reports

• President attacks justices and invokes Section 122 tariff authority — Within hours of the Supreme Court's ruling, the President issued a proclamation under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 imposing a 10% temporary import surcharge on virtually all imports, effective February 24, then raised it to 15% by Saturday. The President publicly attacked the justices who ruled against him, calling them "fools and lapdogs," praised the three dissenters by name, and alleged foreign influence over the Court. Treasury Secretary Bessent announced the goal is to achieve the same tariff posture through different legal channels with revenue "virtually unchanged."
• Trump responds to tariff ruling with public criticism of justices and announces new tariff order — After learning of the Supreme Court's tariff decision, Trump publicly attacked the justices in the majority, including two he appointed, calling them "fools," "lapdogs," and "unpatriotic." He claimed the Court had been "swayed by foreign interests" and that "obnoxious, ignorant and loud" people had frightened the justices. Trump then announced he would sign an order imposing a 10% global tariff under a different law permitting such action for 150 days, stating he had "the right to do tariffs" and did not need to work with Congress. That evening, he posted on social media confirming he had signed the order, effective "almost immediately."
• Trump held emergency press conference attacking Supreme Court justices — Trump held an unhinged emergency press conference after learning of the tariff ruling during a breakfast meeting with governors. He called the decision a "disgrace," attacked Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett as "fools and lapdogs for the RINOs," and claimed they were "disloyal to our Constitution." Trump alleged without evidence that foreign interests had "undue influence" over the Supreme Court and suggested Democrats should pack the court with 21 justices. He refused to commit to honoring potential refunds of $175 billion in tariffs already collected and claimed he had authority to "destroy the country" through trade actions.
• Trump's angry outburst after tariff ruling — After learning of the Supreme Court's tariff decision during a meeting with governors, Trump abruptly cleared the press from the room and engaged in an angry outburst. Witnesses reported him repeatedly attacking the courts and screaming profanities. Later, in a press conference, Trump called the justices "a disgrace to our nation," "fools," "lapdogs," and "very unpatriotic," with his remarks becoming increasingly unhinged.
• Trump attacked Supreme Court justices and announced plan to circumvent tariff ruling — Following the Supreme Court's decision blocking his emergency tariff authority, President Trump called the justices who ruled against him "very unpatriotic and disloyal to our Constitution," suggested without evidence that they are being swayed by "foreign interests," and announced he will impose a 10% "global tariff" under a different statute—the International Emergency Economic Powers Act—which limits tariffs to 150 days unless authorized by Congress.
• Trump attacked Supreme Court Justices over IEEPA tariff ruling — After learning of the Supreme Court's IEEPA ruling, Trump publicly attacked the three conservative Justices who voted against him, calling them "fools and lapdogs for the RINOs and the radical left Democrats" and accusing them of being "unpatriotic and disloyal to our Constitution." He also claimed the Court had been "swayed by foreign interests." These statements constituted a direct assault on the judicial branch's independence and legitimacy.
• President attacks Supreme Court justices by name — The President publicly denounced the six justices who voted to strike down the IEEPA tariffs, calling them "fools and lapdogs," alleged that foreign interests had undue influence over the Court, and praised the three dissenters by name. This public attack on the judiciary followed immediately after the ruling.

Supporting reports

• Judge Provinzino held government attorney in civil contempt — U.S. District Judge Laura Provinzino held a military lawyer on special assignment with the Department of Justice in civil contempt for failing to comply with her court order in a habeas case. ICE had released a detainee in Texas without returning identification documents, including a Minnesota driver's license and Mexican consular ID. The attorney acknowledged the office was overwhelmed and "the ball was dropped." The contempt finding carried a $500-per-day enforcement mechanism until compliance, which was lifted after documents were returned.
• U.S. Attorney called contempt ruling "lawless abuse of judicial power" — Following Judge Provinzino's contempt finding against a government attorney, the U.S. Attorney's office responded by characterizing the ruling as "a lawless abuse of judicial power," representing an executive branch rejection of judicial authority and enforcement mechanisms.

Supporting reports

• New Jersey federal judge orders Trump administration to explain non-compliance with court orders — US District Judge Michael Farbiarz in New Jersey ordered the Trump administration to explain what procedures are in place to ensure court orders in his district are followed consistently and on time. Farbiarz found that Trump officials failed to meet court-ordered deadlines for bond hearings in immigration court in 12 of roughly 550 cases since December 5, 2025. The judge stated that "Judicial orders should never be violated."
• Federal judge Sykes rules Trump administration violating detention law and contempt of court orders — US District Judge Sunshine Sykes in Riverside, California issued a scathing decision accusing the Trump administration of terrorizing immigrants and recklessly violating federal law through mass deportations and mandatory detention policies. Sykes found the administration had violated her December ruling requiring detainees receive notice of bond eligibility and phone access to attorneys within one hour. She also threw out a September immigration court ruling the administration had cited to justify mandatory detention. The judge noted the administration's failure to comply with multiple court orders nationwide, citing killings of two US citizens (Renée Good and Alex Pretti) by ICE and border patrol during protests in Minnesota.
• Minnesota federal judge finds Trump administration lawyer in contempt of court — A federal judge in Minnesota found a Trump administration lawyer in contempt of court on Wednesday for the government's failure to comply with an order to return identification documents to an immigrant the judge had ordered released. This represents a rare judicial sanction against the administration for non-compliance with court orders in immigration cases.
• Trump administration reverses bond hearing access for detained immigrants — The Trump administration reversed the longstanding practice under past administrations that allowed people with no criminal record to request bond hearings before an immigration judge while their cases proceeded through immigration court. With access to bond hearings cut off, immigrants by the thousands have filed separate petitions in federal court seeking release. More than 20,000 habeas corpus cases have been filed since Trump's inauguration, according to federal court records analyzed by the Associated Press.

Supporting reports

• Preliminary injunction ruling — State of Minnesota v. Noem (D. Minn.) 0:26-cv-00190 — A magistrate judge denied Minnesota's motion for expedited discovery, holding that despite the “far-reaching and deeply traumatizing effects” of Operation Metro Surge, Plaintiffs had not shown good cause because they had not yet filed the contemplated preliminary injunction motion or narrowly targeted their request to support specific and necessary ends.
• Stay motion decided — Lesly Miot v. Trump (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-02471 — A coalition of 17 states and the District of Columbia filed an amicus brief in opposition to the emergency motion to stay pending appeal.
• Case update — Democracy Forward Foundation v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-04424 — Defendant answered Plaintiff's complaint and included the defense that its actions did not violate FOIA or other statutory provisions.
• Case update — State of Washington v. Federal Emergency Management Agency (D. Mass.) 1:25-cv-12006 — Plaintiff States filed a Motion to Enforce Judgment.
• Motion to dismiss decided — State of New York v. Department of Education (D. Mass.) 1:25-cv-11116 — Judge Young granted parties' joint motion to dismiss the complaint without prejudice after the administration withdrew its appeal in American Federation of Teachers v. Department of Education of a court order vacating the same challenged agency action.
• Ruling vacated — Lazaro Maldonado Bautista v. Ernesto Santacruz Jr. (C.D. Cal.) 5:25-cv-01873 — Judge Sykes granted Plaintiffs' motion to enforce judgment, finding that the government violated her prior order by continuing to detain noncitizens without a bond hearing. Judge Sykes vacated a Board of Immigration Appeals decision that conflicted with her order, finding that the administration's continued reliance on that decision “far crossed the boundaries of constitutional conduct.” Judge Sykes also ordered the government to provide notice to a nationwide class of detained noncitizens of their ability to seek bond hearings under her order.
• Stay motion decided — U.H.A. et al v. Bondi et al (D. Minn.) 0:26-cv-00417 — Judge Tunheim granted the motion to stay consideration of Plaintiffs' contempt motion for seven days.
• Case update — Center for Constitutional Rights v. United States Department of State (S.D.N.Y.) 1:25-cv-06879 — Defendants filed a status report which indicates that USAID had begun its production of priority documents to Plaintiff and that the parties would continue to confer on narrowing the scope of Defendants' searches in light of USAID initially locating over 17 million potentially responsive records and DOS initially locating over 900,000 pages of responsive records.
• Case update — Vizguerra-Ramirez v. Choate et al (D. Colo.) 1:25-cv-00881 — In a minute order , Judge Wang directed that the case be administratively closed.
• Complaint filed — Lemmon v. Trump (D.D.C. 1:26-cv-00544) — Private plaintiffs, including Vietnam War veterans, diplomats, and a historic preservation expert, filed a complaint in D.D.C. challenging President Trump's proposed 25-story "Independence Arch" on Memorial Circle between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery. Plaintiffs allege the administration violated the Commemorative Works Act, National Historic Preservation Act, and National Environmental Policy Act by proceeding without required legislative approval and environmental review on an accelerated schedule ahead of July 4, 2026. They seek declaratory and injunctive relief to bar construction and have filed a motion for preliminary injunction.
• Complaint filed: Williams v. National Aeronautics and Space Administration — Two scientists and an association of engineers and scientists at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center filed suit in D.D.C. against NASA and the Archivist of the United States, challenging the September 2025 reversal of NASA's records-preservation framework and the closure of the Goddard Information and Collaboration Center and NASA Space Science Data Coordinated Archive. Plaintiffs allege the decisions violated the Administrative Procedure Act as arbitrary and capricious and seek vacatur, rescission, and an order requiring preservation of the database and records.
• Motion granted — Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance v. United States Department of the Interior (D. Utah) 2:25-cv-00657 — Judge Barlow granted a motion allowing Peak Minerals, the owner of mineral leases at stake in Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance's lawsuit against the government, to intervene in the case.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Citizens For Responsibility And Ethics In Washington v. Department Of Justice (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-04426 — Judge Kollar-Kotelly issued an order which granted in part and denied in part Plaintiff's preliminary injunction motion . The DOJ was ordered to expedite its processing of CREW's FOIA requests, however Judge Kollar-Kotelly declined to direct the DOJ to process its requests at a specific rate, instead opting to direct the parties to develop a proposal for the expedited processing and production of the most urgent records.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — Tincher v. Noem (D. Minn.) 0:25-cv-04669 — The Eight Circuit stayed the appeal proceedings pending an indicative ruling by the district court on a motion to dissolve the preliminary injunction, following the reported end of Operation Metro Surge in Minneapolis.
• Appeal filed — State of Illinois v. Noem (D.R.I.) 1:25-cv-00495 — The government appealed Judge McElroy's Dec. 22, 2025 order granting summary judgment to Plaintiffs to the First Circuit (Case No. 26-1182 ).
• Case update — Jorge Lujan v. FMCSA (D.C. Cir.) 25-1215 — The court severed Lujan v. FMCSA , 26-1032 from Lujan v. FMCSA , 25-1215. The court ordered Lujan v. FMCSA , 25-1215 remain in abeyance pending further order of the court following the disposition of Lujan v. FMCSA , 26-1032.
• Case update — Jorge Lujan v. FMCSA (D.C. Cir.) 26-1032 — Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint alleging they have exhausted administrative remedies under FOIA and are now entitled to an injunction.
• Case update — Protect Democracy Project v. U.S. Department of the Treasury (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-04101 — The court consolidated American Public Health Association v. EPA , 26-1037 with Elena Venner v. EPA , 26-1038. These cases will proceed under American Public Health Association v. EPA .
• Cases consolidated — American Public Health Association v. EPA (D.C. Cir.) 26-1037

Supporting reports

• Utah legislature passes law restricting redistricting jurisdiction to state supreme court — The Republican-controlled Utah legislature enacted a state law providing that only the Utah Supreme Court may hear redistricting cases going forward, a jurisdictional restriction designed to consolidate control over future redistricting disputes.
• Utah legislature pushes back congressional candidate filing deadlines — The Republican-controlled Utah legislature postponed congressional candidate filing deadlines as part of a broader effort to delay implementation of the court-ordered redistricting map and maintain the 2021 map for the 2026 election.

Supporting reports

• Immigration judges fired without cause under Trump's second term — Approximately 100 of 735 immigration judges nationwide have been fired without cause since Trump's second term began in 2025, including judges with low asylum grant rates. The Justice Department is actively recruiting replacements and has made clear through recruiting materials that "conscientious adjudication of asylum claims is no longer the point," explicitly advertising positions as "deportation judge" roles focused on maximizing deportations rather than fair adjudication.

Supporting reports

• U.S. District Court Judge Ana C. Reyes issued temporary restraining order blocking termination of Haiti's Temporary Protected Status — U.S. District Court Judge Ana C. Reyes issued a temporary restraining order stopping Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's termination of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for approximately 353,000 Haitian nationals pending resolution of a lawsuit challenging the termination. The judge found that Noem ignored statutory procedures and criteria established by Congress, instead relying on ideological hostility to nonwhite immigrants. Reyes noted that Noem has terminated all twelve TPS designations that reached her desk and that the factual record contradicts the administration's characterization of TPS holders as criminals or economic drains.
• Federal judge temporarily blocked termination of Haitian TPS protections — A federal judge in Washington, D.C. issued a temporary halt to the planned termination of Temporary Protected Status for Haitian nationals scheduled to take effect on February 3, 2026. The injunction paused removal proceedings that would have exposed TPS-covered individuals to increased risk of deportation to Haiti.
• Federal judge blocks Trump administration's revocation of Haitian temporary protected status — Judge Ana Reyes issued a temporary stay blocking Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's decision to revoke temporary protected status (TPS) for approximately 350,000 Haitians. The revocation was scheduled to take effect on Tuesday. Reyes found that plaintiffs—five Haitian TPS holders including a neuroscientist, software engineer, laboratory assistant, college student, and registered nurse—were likely to prevail on the merits and that Noem's decision appeared preordained by "hostility to nonwhite immigrants." During the stay, the termination has no legal effect and TPS holders retain work authorization and deportation protections.
• Federal judge blocks Trump administration's termination of Haitian TPS, but ICE enforcement threat persists in Springfield, Ohio — U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes issued a ruling on Monday, February 3, 2026, blocking the Trump administration's attempt to end Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Haitians. The decision pauses the termination while litigation proceeds. However, despite this legal victory, thousands of Haitians in Springfield, Ohio—where 10,000 to 15,000 remain—face ongoing fear of ICE raids. Local businesses have closed, families are making deportation contingency plans, and uncertainty persists about whether federal immigration enforcement will target the community.

Supporting reports

• Federal judge dismisses DOJ lawsuit in California voter data case — A federal judge, identified as Judge David O. Carter, dismissed the Department of Justice's lawsuit in California challenging the state's refusal to provide voter registration data. In his opinion, Judge Carter characterized the case as a fundamental threat to democratic governance, stating that the erosion of privacy and rolling back of voting rights should be decided by the Legislative Branch, not the Executive, and that the Executive may not unilaterally usurp authority over elections.

Supporting reports

• Federal judge blocks Trump administration from detaining lawfully resettled refugees in Minnesota — US District Judge John R Tunheim issued a temporary restraining order halting the Trump administration's arrest and detention of lawfully resettled refugees in Minnesota, following a class-action lawsuit. The ruling mandated immediate release of all detained refugees in Minnesota and release of those transferred to Texas within five days. The detentions occurred under "Operation Parris," a DHS "re-vetting" initiative targeting 5,600 resettled refugees who had not yet become permanent residents. More than 100 refugees had been arrested in recent weeks, some flown to detention centers in Texas and released without resources to return home.
• Temporary restraining order ruling — U.H.A. et al v. Bondi et al (D. Minn.) 0:26-cv-00417 — Judge Tunheim granted Plaintiffs' motion for a temporary restraining order of Operation PARRIS , enjoining the administration from arresting or detaining a putative class of Minnesota refugees who have not yet adjusted to lawful permanent resident status and have not been charged with any ground for removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act solely on the basis of their status. He also ordered refugees detained on these grounds be immediately released.

Supporting reports

• Federal judge summons ICE acting head Todd Lyons to court for alleged defiance of court orders — Minnesota's top federal judge summoned Todd Lyons, the acting head of ICE, to appear in court on Friday for allegedly defying court orders. The judge stated "The court's patience is at an end," signaling potential contempt of court proceedings against the ICE leader for failing to comply with judicial directives.
• Minnesota federal judge summons ICE acting director for contempt over defiance of court orders — Chief US District Judge Patrick Schiltz issued a three-page order summoning acting ICE director Todd Lyons to appear before him on Friday, warning of potential contempt charges. Schiltz accused the Trump administration of deliberately delaying or ignoring judicial directives across Minnesota's federal courts during "Operation Metro Surge," an aggressive immigration enforcement campaign. The judge cited a specific case in which he had ordered a man released on January 15 who remained in custody as of Monday night, and noted that detained immigrants had been sent to Texas or released far from home without means to return, causing "significant hardship."
• Multiple Minnesota federal judges weigh legal challenges to Operation Metro Surge immigration enforcement — Several Minnesota federal judges are considering broader legal challenges that could significantly restrict federal immigration enforcement in the state or halt Operation Metro Surge entirely. US District Judge Michael Davis accused the administration of attempting to "defy court orders" and "deny noncitizens their due process rights." Judge Kate Menendez ordered government lawyers to respond by Wednesday evening to claims the operation was designed to punish Minnesota for its sanctuary policies. Another federal judge is weighing whether the deployment of 3,000 immigration agents constitutes an unconstitutional occupation, a case that gained momentum following the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti by federal officers.
• Federal judge orders ICE director to appear in court and threatens contempt — Minnesota's chief federal judge, U.S. District Judge Patrick Schiltz (appointed by President Bush), ordered the head of ICE, Todd Lyons, to appear in his courtroom on Friday and threatened to hold him in contempt for repeated defiance of judges' orders in the state. Judge Schiltz stated "The court's patience is at an end." The order came in response to the Trump administration's massive immigration enforcement action in the Twin Cities, which has flooded courts with emergency lawsuits. Schiltz noted that the administration has been slow-walking or outright defying directives of many Minnesota judges, including at least one of his own orders for release that was not complied with.
• Federal judge orders ICE director to appear in court for contempt of court — Judge Patrick J. Schiltz of the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota ordered Todd Lyons, the acting director of ICE, to appear in court on Friday to explain why he was not in contempt of court after ICE officials apparently ignored Schiltz's order to permit a detainee to have a bond hearing or be released. On Tuesday, the government released the detainee. On Wednesday, Schiltz canceled the Friday hearing but identified "96 court orders that ICE has violated in 74 cases" and warned that he would haul Lyons or other government officials into court if they continued ignoring court rulings.
• Minnesota federal judge issues scathing order documenting 96 ICE court order violations — Minnesota's Chief Federal Judge Schiltz issued an order that included an appendix identifying 96 court orders that ICE has violated in 74 cases. The judge stated: "This list should give pause to anyone—no matter his or her political beliefs—who cares about the rule of law. ICE has likely violated more court orders in Jan 2026 than some federal agencies have violated in their entire existence."

Supporting reports

• FBI Director Kash Patel launches investigation into Signal group chats used by protesters — FBI Director Kash Patel announced on January 26 that he launched an investigation into Signal group chats used by protesters in Minnesota to share information about federal immigration agents, including their locations and license plate numbers. The move targets legally obtained information and the act of recording law enforcement officials, both protected by the First Amendment.
• Justice Department appeals to Eighth Circuit after judge declines to issue arrest warrants for CNN anchor and protesters — Federal prosecutors sought Chief Judge Schiltz's assistance in arresting former CNN anchor Don Lemon and others linked to an anti-ICE church protest. After Schiltz declined to overturn a magistrate's denial of arrest warrants, the Justice Department appealed directly to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. The circuit court rejected the government's request, prompting Schiltz to write letters criticizing the Justice Department's approach and highlighting the flood of "illegal" detention cases overwhelming Minnesota courts.
• FBI director announced investigation of Signal chats of Minneapolis observers — FBI Director Kash Patel told a right-wing podcaster that the FBI will investigate Signal chats of those organized in Minneapolis to observe and record federal agents, to determine if they endangered federal agents. Podcaster Benny Johnson suggested the chats were "coordinated infrastructure" and asked the FBI to "take a crack at trying to get rid of this infrastructure the way they approach the mob or cartels or other terrorist networks."
• TikTok suppresses anti-ICE videos following Oracle acquisition — Following TikTok's acquisition by an Oracle-led consortium in late January 2026, users reported inability to upload videos critical of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Law professor Stephen Vladeck reported his anti-ICE video remained "under review" for nine hours; comedian Megan Stalter and California State Sen. Scott Wiener also reported suppression. TikTok attributed the issue to a data center outage, but the timing coincided with Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison's known Trump loyalty, raising concerns about state influence over the platform's content moderation.
• Federal agents arrested journalist Don Lemon on FACE Act and civil rights conspiracy charges — More than two dozen federal agents arrested independent journalist Don Lemon late on January 29, charging him with violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act and conspiring to hurt the exercise of rights—a Reconstruction-era law originally used against the Ku Klux Klan. Lemon had filmed protesters disrupting a church service in St. Paul, Minnesota, on January 18 at a white nationalist church with ties to the Trump administration. A magistrate judge and federal judge had both refused to issue warrants; the administration then sought indictment via federal grand jury. Lemon stated he would plead not guilty and continue his journalism.
• Federal agents arrest Don Lemon and three journalists — On January 29, federal agents arrested Don Lemon and three other journalists in relation to their coverage of an anti-ICE protest inside a St. Paul, Minnesota church. Lemon has been charged with conspiring to deprive others of their civil rights and violating the FACE Act by allegedly obstructing access to a house of worship. The arrests come one week after a federal magistrate judge rejected the Justice Department's initial request to bring charges. Lemon's lawyer Abbe Lowell called the move an "unprecedented attack on the First Amendment" and a "transparent attempt to distract attention from the many crises facing this administration."
• Federal magistrate and district judge refused to issue arrest warrants for Don Lemon — A federal magistrate judge refused to issue a warrant for Don Lemon and his producer, stating prosecutors had not shown evidence justifying arrest. When the administration asked a federal judge to overturn that decision, the judge also refused, calling the request "unprecedented." The administration then escalated the case to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, which also refused to intervene.
• DOJ charges Don Lemon and three others with civil rights crimes related to Minnesota church protest — The Department of Justice charged former CNN anchor Don Lemon and three others with federal civil rights crimes, alleging they interfered with religious freedom at a church in Minnesota earlier in January. Lemon was arrested in Los Angeles on Thursday while covering the Grammy Awards and released Friday. The charges also invoked the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act. A federal magistrate judge had previously declined to sign an arrest warrant for Lemon, but the DOJ proceeded with charges anyway. The White House celebrated the arrest on social media.
• Don Lemon arrested on charges connected to Minnesota church protest — Ex-CNN anchor Don Lemon, 59, was arrested on charges related to a Minnesota church protest. Lemon, who was terminated by CNN in 2023 following allegations of problematic behavior toward female colleagues and controversial on-air remarks, has since worked as an independent journalist on YouTube. The arrest marks a significant development in his career trajectory following his departure from mainstream media.
• Federal agents arrest journalist Georgia Fort for covering ICE protest at Minnesota church — Georgia Fort, an independent Minnesota journalist, was arrested at her home on January 30 after covering a January 18 protest at St. Paul's Cities church, where a pastor reportedly works for ICE. Fort was charged alongside Don Lemon under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE Act) and conspiracy statutes—charges experts call unprecedented against journalists. The DOJ pursued the case aggressively after a federal judge and appeals court initially refused to charge the journalists; a grand jury eventually secured an indictment. Fort livestreamed her arrest and has since been unable to cover related stories due to legal and safety concerns.
• Federal agents conduct search of Fort's home and question her children — When federal agents arrested Georgia Fort at her home on January 30, approximately two dozen agents remained outside for hours after her arrest. As Fort's family attempted to leave, agents stopped them in the driveway and questioned her children about whether they possessed her laptop or cellphone. Fort's daughters, aged 17, 8, and 7, were terrified by the encounter. The youngest daughter now discusses ICE daily; the oldest has experienced nightmares. Fort stated agents could have waited until children left for school and questioned why so many agents were needed to arrest a journalist.
• Journalist Don Lemon arrested by Trump administration after covering anti-ICE protest — Former CNN anchor Don Lemon was arrested on January 30, 2026, by federal agents at a Los Angeles hotel while covering the Grammy Awards. The Trump administration obtained a federal grand jury indictment against Lemon, independent journalist Georgia Fort, and others on charges of conspiracy and interfering with worshippers' constitutional rights during an anti-immigration enforcement protest at a Minnesota church on January 18. A federal magistrate judge had previously refused to sign an arrest warrant for Lemon. On February 8, Lemon spoke publicly about the arrest, characterizing it as an attack on press freedom and warning that democracy becomes "hollow" when the First Amendment is threatened.
• Federal agents arrested journalist Georgia Fort and two protest participants — Federal agents arrested independent journalist Georgia Fort of Minnesota, along with two protest participants, Trahern Jeen Crews and Jamael Lydell Lundy, in connection with the January 18 church protest in St. Paul. All four people arrested in the past 24 hours are Black.
• Don Lemon arrested on federal civil rights charges — Former CNN anchor Don Lemon was arrested by federal authorities and charged with federal civil rights crimes in connection with a protest at a Minnesota church service earlier in January. The Department of Homeland Security stated Lemon was charged with conspiracy and interfering with the First Amendment rights of worshipers. His attorney Abbe Lowell stated Lemon's "constitutionally protected work in Minneapolis was no different than what he has always done" and characterized the arrest as "an unprecedented attack on the first amendment." Career DOJ prosecutors in Minnesota and Louisiana refused to be involved in charging Lemon and other journalists who covered the Minneapolis church protests, believing the evidence does not support the charges.