Litigation over Executive Orders (Non-Immigration Edition)
Description
The panel will discuss the unprecedented number of President Trump’s executive orders currently facing legal challenges (either on the emergency docket or otherwise). At stake in these cases are the constitutional status of independent agencies, challenges to the administration’s authority to impose tariffs, lawsuits opposing funding restrictions on universities, and more. (As noted, immigration challenges will be discussed in a separate break-out panel).
Materials for Panel
Active Litigation Trackers
- Tracking the lawsuits against the Trump administration - AP News
- Major cases involving Trump before the US Supreme Court - Reuters
- Trump Administration Litigation Tracker - Lawfare
DOGE Litigation
U.S. Doge Service v. Center for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington:
The watchdog group filed a FOIA request for communications and other information between the DOGE administrator, Amy Gleason, and DOGE staff, as well as financial disclosures submitted by DOGE personnel. SCOTUS send the dispute back to the D.C. Circuit. While the lower court conducts another review, and if the government appeals, the discovery orders from CREW are on hold.
Issue: Whether the Supreme Court should stay the district court's orders permitting discovery of certain DOGE materials pursuant to FOIA.
- Application for a Stay
- Response to application from respondent Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
- Reply of applicant U.S. Doge Service, et al.
- Application for Stay is Granted
- Case file
- Supreme Court sides with Trump in two DOGE suits - Amy Howe, SCOTUSblog
Social Security Administration v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees:
Issue: Whether the Supreme Court should stay the district court's injunction blocking Department of Government Efficiency team members and affiliates from accessing Social Security Administration record systems.
- Application for a stay
- Response to application from respondents
- Reply of applicants SSA
- Application of Stay Granted
- Case file
- Unions, advocacy group tell justices not to let DOGE access Social Security records - Amy Howe, SCOTUSblog
Trump v. American Federation of Government Employees:
SCOTUS agreed with a lower court’s stay of execution of a judgment preventing DOGE from restructuring the federal government by firing federal employees en masse.
Issue: Whether the Supreme Court should stay the district court's nationwide injunction barring the executive branch from formulating and implementing plans to initiate large-scale reductions of the federal workforce.
- Application for a stay
- Response to application from respondents American Federation of Government Employees, et al
- Application for stay granted - Opinion
- Case file
- Supreme Court opens door to large-scale federal layoffs - Danielle J. Brown and Sam Gauntt, Missouri Independent
- Implementing Memo - Office of Management and Budget and Office of Personnel Management
McMahon v. New York:
SCOTUS temporarily allowed the firing of Department of Education employees by granting an application to stay.
Issue: Whether the Supreme Court should stay a district court order requiring the government to reinstate Department of Education employees fired as part of a reduction in force.
- Application to stay the injunction
- Response to application from Somerville Public Schools, et al.
- Response to application from State respondents
- Reply of applicants Linda McMahon, et al.
- Application to stay the injunction granted - Opinion
- Supreme Court allows Trump administration to implement plans to significantly reduce the federal workforce - Amy Howe, SCOTUSblog
- Trump administration again comes to the Supreme Court seeking large-scale reductions in the federal workforce - Amy Howe, SCOTUSblog
- The Supreme Court just handed Trump his biggest victory of his second term - Ian Millhiser, Vox
- Supreme Court Lets Trump Continue Education Department Layoffs - Greg Stohr, Bloomberg
Independent Agency Firings
- Will the court overturn a 1930s precedent to expand presidential power, again? - Ellena Erskine, SCOTUSblog
Trump v. Wilcox
SCOTUS temporarily allowed President Trump to fire two agency heads of the National Labor Relations Board and Merit Systems Protection Board on May 22, 2025.
Issue: Whether the Supreme Court should stay the district court's orders reinstating Gwynne Wilcox and Cathy Harris to the National Labor Relations Board and Merit Systems Protection Board.
- Application for a stay
- Response to application from respondent Wilcox filed
- Response from applicant Harris filed
- Reply of applicants Trump, et al. filed
- Application for Stay Granted
- Case file
- Supreme Court allows Trump to remove agency heads without cause for now - Amy Howe, SCOTUSblog
- Orders to reinstate agency heads on hold as court considers Trump’s appeal - Amy Howe, SCOTUSblog
- Rethinking Removal Protections - Alisa Klein, Yale Journal on Regulation
Trump v. Boyle
SCOTUS temporarily allowed the Trump administration to remove three members of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.
Issue: Whether the Supreme Court should stay the district court's judgment reinstating three members of the Consumer Product Safety Commission who had been removed by President Donald Trump.
- Application for a stay
- Response to request for administrative stay from respondent Boyle
- Response to Application from respondent Boyle
- Reply of applicant Pres. Trump, et al.
- Letter of Applicant
- Application for stay granted
- Case file
- Federal employees urge Supreme Court to keep order in place preventing their firing - Amy Howe, SCOTUSblog
- Trump administration urges the court to pause a ruling preventing it from firing Consumer Product Safety Commission members - Amy Howe, SCOTUSblog
Tariff Challenges
Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump
Small businesses Learning Resources and hand2mind went to federal court in Washington, D.C., challenging Trump’s authority under IEEPA to impose the tariffs. The Court declined to fast-track the companies’ petition.
Issue: Whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act authorizes the president to impose tariffs.
- Case file
- Petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment filed
- Motion to expedite consideration of the petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment filed by petitioners Learning Resources, Inc. et al
- Response to Motion from respondent Pres. Trump, et al.
- Reply of petitioners in support of motion to expedite
- Brief of respondents in opposition
- Reply of Learning Resources, Inc. et al.
- Businesses challenge Trump’s tariffs before Supreme Court - Amy Howe, SCOTUSblog
- Appellate judges question Trump’s authority to impose tariffs without Congress - Paul Wiseman and Matt Sedensky, AP News
- What happens next in the US court battle over Trump's tariffs? - Jan Wolfe and Dietrich Knauth, Reuters