Dozens of lawsuits against Trump chronicled in handy online tracker

In the first 24 hours of Donald Trump’s new administration, the president signed 26 executive orders, setting an anti-progressive agenda in motion. Dozens more orders followed in the weeks after, with the Trump administration enacting 89 executive actions as of March, according to the nonpartisan American Presidency Project.

Legal challenges rolled in almost immediately. A mere six days after Trump’s inauguration, Just Security, an online forum and publisher of legal and political analysis, had enough court filings and legal headlines to warrant a digital, Trump-focused litigation tracker — a running list of the civil rights organizations, labor unions, state governments, and individuals who have been pushing back against the barrage of executive orders and policy changes. Other legal groups have launched similar trackers.

As of this story’s publishing, Just Security’s tracker shows 119 open cases across 10 different topic areas, from government grants and assistance to environmental policy, like Trump’s rescission of the United States’ climate pledges and the deletion of climate data on federal sites.

Several federal courts have interceded in the president’s actions, blocking or delaying some and reaffirming others. Here’s a brief rundown of the administration’s largest legal battlegrounds:

Attacks on LGBTQ rights 

The Trump administration took little time in issuing an anti-transgender executive order in its first week, declaring the existence of just “two biological sexes,” determined at the “point of conception.” The order has already initiated a rolling back of protections for LGBTQ people and the weaponization of federal law against trans communities, according to both the Human Rights Campaign and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

The ACLU filed a federal lawsuit against the U.S. State Department on behalf of seven plaintiffs for a new policy that bans the “X” gender marker on U.S. identification and forces individuals to carry passports listed with their assigned sex at birth rather than their gender identity. The ACLU argues that this violates Americans’ right to travel and right to privacy, as well as the constitution’s Equal Protection Clause. 

Several other lawsuits, including one filed by LGBTQ nonprofit PFLAG, challenge a Trump executive order that bans gender affirming care for transgender youth and another order that bans transgender student athletes from teams that align with their gender identity. PFLAG argues that such restrictions are a form of discrimination and an excessive use of presidential powers. 

Two cases take issue with the Pentagon’s ban and removal of trans people serving in the military under the Constitution’s due process and equal protection clauses, revitalizing a similar legal challenge during Trump’s first term. Three other lawsuits focus on the forced housing of transgender inmates in prisons that don’t align with their gender identity, a policy that studies indicate increases rates of violence and sexual trauma while contributing to a lower quality of care among prison populations.

Purging of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) efforts

Amid the flurry of first day actions, Trump also signed an executive order entitled “Ending Radical And Wasteful Government DEI Programs And Preferencing” that directed the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to eradicate “illegal DEI” policies and programs. One day later, the president issued a follow-up order that revoked several equal employment opportunity directives. 

Several higher education groups, including the National Education Association (NEA) and American Federation of Teachers (AFT), are suing the administration for its OMB anti-DEI directives. Both the NEA and AFT’s cases center on a Dear Colleague Letter published by the Department of Education Office for Civil Rights, which enforced a U.S. Supreme Court decision that would ban affirmative action and direct colleges to end DEI programs or lose federal funding. The organizations argue the ban is a violation of free speech, due process, and the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs rule making by federal agencies.

Other national organizations, like the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education and the National Urban League, filed lawsuits claiming the executive orders against DEI and equal employment policies were similarly unconstitutional. Regional and community groups also filed suit against the termination of DEI programs, citing the order’s impact on funding, programming, and their constituencies themselves. Groups include the San Francisco AIDS Foundation and Chicago Women in Trades. 

The lawsuits don’t just castigate Trump — federal entities implicated in these lawsuits include the National Endowment for the Arts, acting Education Secretary Denise Carter, and the entire Department of Education.

Immigration and denial of birthright citizenship 

In compliance with an executive order titled “Protecting The American People Against Invasion,” Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) have ramped up their efforts to detain and remove undocumented people residing in the U.S., in line with Trump’s goal to deport migrants in historic numbers during his second term. 

For example, the administration has ordered expedited removals of certain residents without trials under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) — immigrant rights nonprofit Make the Road New York sued the administration arguing the unconstitutionality of the order. On Jan. 20, the DHS issued a new set of ICE and CBP guidelines rescinding Biden administration rules that prevented agents from conducting raids close to or in “sensitive” areas, such as places of worship, schools, and hospitals. Dozens of religious and cultural groups, including Quaker and Mennonite congregations, as well as the Denver Public School System, filed separate lawsuits against the DHS for violating the constitution’s right to the freedom of religion, as well as the Administrative Procedure Act and Freedom of Information Act.

Other actions being fought in courts include the decision by Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem to revoke Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Venezuelan asylum seekers, the removal of refugee and asylum programs, the sunsetting of the CBP One app, and the decision to transfer detained migrant populations to Guantanamo Bay. 

Another day one executive order, “Protecting The Meaning And Value Of American Citizenship,” excluded birthright citizenship for the children of undocumented residents. Just Security reports the order has received more than a dozen legal challenges —  submitted by the ACLU, immigrant rights organizations, 18 state governments, and individuals affected by the new policy — arguing that it is a misinterpretation of the rights afforded in the Fourteenth Amendment.

Mismanagement of government funding and employees

The actions of the Trump-branded Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and its leader Elon Musk (aka the head honcho of X, SpaceX and Tesla), have faced a multitude of legal challenges, Just Security notes. 

Advocacy group Public Citizen and several workers unions sued the OMB for establishing DOGE under the Executive Office of the President, arguing that allowing a private citizen (Musk) to access citizen information is a violation of the Federal Advisory Committee Act — the case was later dropped in favor of pursuing the issue in separate cases. Public Citizen also took the Treasury Department to court for allegedly allowing DOGE to access citizens’ sensitive data. National Security Counselors, Inc. and the American Public Health Association have sued on similar grounds, and at least a dozen other lawsuits have been filed challenging DOGE’s access to personal and financial information at large. Plaintiffs in those cases include the Electronic Privacy Information Center, the University of California Students Association, the Alliance for Retired Americans and the American Federation of Government Employees. 

Other groups — like Democracy Forward, Project on Government Oversight and Environmental Defense Fund — have filed Freedom of Information Act requests to access details on DOGE operations. Several lawsuits, including one brought forth by a group of U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) employees, challenge Musk’s appointment by evoking the Appointments Clause, as he wasn’t confirmed by an official Senate vote. 

In February, Trump ordered a freeze on federal grants and loans. While the general freeze was halted by a judge who questioned its constitutionality, budget and grant funding has remained under attack by DOGE. Multiple groups challenged the administration for revoking funding, including the National Association of Nonprofits and 23 attorneys general in a joint filing. Other groups, including the Global Health Council and American Foreign Service Association, have filed lawsuits specifically against the dismantling of USAID, as well as cuts at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). 

In March, 19 states and the District of Columbia filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration for the mass firing of recently hired government employees, arguing that probationary employees were falsely misled during their terminations. Prior to this lawsuit, the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) issued an investigation into the firings, and ordered the reinstatement of some staff across agencies, including the U.S. Department of Agriculture.