In the first month of President Trump’s new term, his flood-the-zone strategy has overwhelmed the courts, which are not used to dealing with so many lawsuits so quickly. More than 50 legal challenges to his administration’s actions have been filed at an incredibly fast pace, leading to chaotic showdowns in courtrooms all over the country.
Justice Department lawyers have had to backtrack on statements made too hastily in court, while challengers have struggled to get all the necessary parties involved. Judges are trying to balance acting quickly with making the right decisions.
“It’s hard for me to keep up. I don’t know whether you have been able to keep up,” said U.S. District Judge John Bates during a Monday hearing on online health data that the Trump administration had removed.
In his first weeks back in office, Trump has signed dozens of executive orders, changing policies on issues ranging from immigration to gender and federal employee protections. With lawsuits piling up, those challenging the actions are asking for quick court orders to stop them. Judges have responded by setting weekend deadlines and scheduling emergency hearings within hours of the requests.
“I know it didn’t make your weekends relaxed. It didn’t make mine relaxed either,” joked Judge Bates, who was appointed by President George W. Bush.
The rush to hold hearings has left lawyers unprepared. Sometimes, the proceedings have had to be paused while government attorneys checked in with relevant agencies. For example, during a hearing in Washington, D.C., Justice Department lawyers struggled to reach an agreement with FBI agents who wanted to keep their names hidden in relation to the January 6 cases. The FBI’s lawyers wanted the order to stop all government agencies from releasing the information, but the Justice Department hesitated.
“What is the hesitation?” asked U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb, who was appointed by President Biden.
“The government is a vast entity,” explained Justice Department lawyer Jeremy Simon, noting that such a decision would require approval from every agency. “I’ve had this case for less than 24 hours.”
The hearing dragged on for about six hours as lawyers tried to contact the right people within their agency. An agreement wasn’t reached until the next day.
A similar situation unfolded when unions sued over the plans of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to access Labor Department systems. After the judge first heard the case, he asked both sides to try to work out an agreement. The judge returned an hour later, and government attorneys reported they had talked to Labor Department officials, but no agreement was made. The hearing continued, and in the end, the judge sided with the government.
Even after some hearings, the Justice Department has caught mistakes made in the rush to respond. In one case, government lawyers admitted they had given incorrect information about the government’s designation of an employee connected to DOGE. In another, they incorrectly stated that only 500 employees had been placed on administrative leave when it was actually over 2,000.
It’s not just the Trump administration that’s struggling to keep up. When Democratic state attorneys general filed a lawsuit against DOGE’s access to the Treasury Department’s payment systems, they couldn’t agree on how many states were involved. One office said 12 states would join the lawsuit, another said 14, and when the suit was filed the next day, 19 states had signed on.
Judges are also facing challenges. They’ve often been asked to clarify rulings that were too vague or too broad. In one case, a judge issued strict restrictions early on a Saturday, before the government had a chance to respond, which led to swift backlash from Trump and his allies.
Both sides later agreed the order should be changed so that contractors working on the systems could regain access. Another judge later modified the ruling but refused to lift the restrictions entirely.
As plaintiffs push for fast action, some judges have resisted, preferring to take their time.
“I’ll do what I can when I can,” Judge Bates said during the DOGE-Labor hearing. “I’m not ruling on it sitting up here right now. You’ll have to wait and see when I get it out, and what it says. I will try to be as conscientious as I can, given the fact that it’s now a quarter of 6 on Friday afternoon.”
“It is what it is,” the judge added.
