During the almost three months since the inauguration of President Donald Trump, the lawyers contesting his actions before the court alleged that his administration had violated the judicial orders for half a dozen covers, according to the judicial archives examined by ABC News.
From the unilateral freezing of federal funding to the use of the law on extraterrestrial enemies to expel non-citizens, the clashes have raised concerns concerning the separation of powers and the potential of a constitutional crisis.
The applicants continuing the Trump administration allegedly alleged that the government had violated or ignored legal orders at least six different occasions, but no judge has so far held a member of the Trump administration in court. At least four times, the judges expressed concerns about respecting the Trump administration with the judicial orders.
President Donald Trump speaks as he meets President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador in the Oval Office of the White House, April 14, 2025 in Washington.
Kevin Lamarque / Reuters
The lawyers of the Ministry of Justice vigorously defended the actions of the Trump administration and argued that federal officials strictly respected themselves to legitimate judicial orders, while questioning the legality of certain orders. Each business is underway or on appeal, so that the orders of the district court may be canceled as the higher courts weigh.
Trump has repeatedly promised to respect a court order even if a judge reigns against certain parts of his program, although he tried to question the authority of certain judges.
“Well, I always respect the courts, then I will have to call on,” Trump said Rachel Scott of ABC in February, referring to the business involving the Ministry of Elon Musk’s government. In these cases, Trump suggested that the order of a judge “slowed down the momentum, and it gives people twisted for more time to cover the books. You know, if the person is twisted and that they are caught, others see this and all of a sudden, it becomes more difficult later.”
The Trump administration now faces its most prominent legal battle, when it is trying to keep Kilmar Abrego Garcia in the custody of Salvador despite the Supreme Court ordering its administration to facilitate its release.
Use the Extraterrestrial Enemies Act to withdraw the alleged members of Tren from Aragua
Last month, the Trump administration withdrew more than 100 alleged members of the Venezuelan gang Tren from Aragua to a Salvadoral prison under the Act respecting extraterrestrial enemies despite a federal judge ordering that they are returned to the United States
Un dated photo provided by the American district court of the Maryland district, a man identified by Jennifer Vasquez sura like her husband, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, is directed by force by the guards by the Tecoleca, El Salvador.
American district court for the Maryland district via AP
US District Judge James Boasberg published a directive that two planes carrying men in Salvador returned to the United States on March 15. Although the two planes are still in the air at the time of the prescription, the planes landed in Honduras before flying for El Salvador.
The lawyers representing the Venezuelan men argued that the Trump administration had violated the court order, and judge James Boasberg pointed out that the government “acted in bad faith” when it precipitated the flights of expulsion.
In this March 16, 2023, the file photo, judge James E. Boasberg, chief judge of the DC Federal District Court, means a portrait at the Federal Justice Palace E. Barrett in Washington, DC
Carolyn Van Houten / The Washington Post via Getty Images, file
The Supreme Court has canceled its order blocking any future move under the law on extraterrestrial enemies because the complainants lacked jurisdiction to present a case to DC before the decision of the Supreme Court, judge Boasberg planned to start the outrage procedure.
Trump defended his use of the extraterrestrial enemies law – telling journalists last month that he had the power to withdraw non -citizens under the law – and criticized judge Boasberg several times for blocked the moves.
“”[Secretary of State Marco Rubio has] authority to get out of bad people from our country. And you cannot stop this with a judge sitting behind a bench who has no idea what’s going on, who happens to be a radical left of the left, “Trump told Karen through ABC.
Removal of Kilmar Abrego Garcia
After the Trump administration acknowledged that she had expelled a Salvadoral indigenous who lived in Maryland under a protected legal status due to an “administrative error”, a federal judge ordered the government to facilitate his return to the United States.
Un dated photo provided by Casa, an organization for the defense of immigrants, in April 2025, shows Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
House via AP
After the Trump administration appealed, the United States Supreme Court concluded that Judge Paula Xinis “properly” demanded that the United States facilitates the release of Abrego Garcia from the Salvadoran Guard; However, the High Court ordered Judge Xinis to determine which “deference” Trump is due to his conduct of foreign affairs.
Since the decision of the Supreme Court, the Trump administration has doubled on its allegation according to which Abrego Garcia is a member of MS-13-without providing evidence-and said that he did not have the power to return it to the United States at a meeting with Trump in the Oval Office on Monday, the president of Salvador Nayib Bukile declared that he is missing the power to send the Abrego Garcia to the United States Abrego Garcia in the United States at the US.
“The question is absurd. How can I pass a terrorist to pass a terrorist in the United States?” Said Bukele.
Benjamin Osorio, lawyer for Abrego Garcia, told ABC News that he thought that the Trump administration bothers the court order and an outrageous prescription could be the only thing to encourage the United States government to return its client from Salvador.
Before his meeting with Bukele, Trump told journalists that he would respect an order from the Supreme Court to return Abrego Garcia.
President Donald Trump meets the president of El Salvador, Nayib Bukele, in the oval office of the White House in Washington, April 14, 2025.
Kevin Lamarque / Reuters
“If the Supreme Court said they brought someone, I would do it. I respect the Supreme Court,” said Trump.
Elimination of migrants to third countries
During a hearing last week, a federal judge gave lawyers for the Ministry of Justice for two weeks to provide more information on three recent non-citizen moves to Salvador which took place two days after having expressed a temporary order blocking similar deportations to countries other than their place of origin without an audience to raise concerns about their security.
Judge Brian Murphy described “potential violations of the temporary ban order” like “concerning” and established an audience of April 28 to learn more about deportations.
“This is something that concerns me,” said judge Murphy. “I think that’s something we have to approach.”
The lawyers of the Ministry of Justice agreed to provide more information on the moves and defended the conduct of the administration.
Judge Murphy plans to extend his judicial order which prevents the Trump administration from withdrawing non-citizens from countries other than their place of origin without allowing non-citizens to raise concerns about their security.
Two days after judge Murphy temporarily blocked the deportations, the Trump administration announced that it had moved 17 alleged members of Tren of Aragua and MS-13 to the famous Cecot prison of El Salvador. According to the complainants, some of the men in these thefts had end -up orders in Venezuela and never had the right to challenge their dismissal to Salvador.
Funding unilaterally freezing states
In February, American district judge John McConnell said that a group of state -of -the -art prosecutors had presented evidence that the Trump administration “continued to freeze the federal funds badly and refused to resume the disbursement of the appropriate federal funds” to the states despite a “clear and impassable” order from preventing them from preventing funding.
He ordered the government to “immediately restore frozen funding” although the state prosecutor was later provided proof that the Trump administration continued to suspend funding from FEMA. Many financing flows were restored in the months which followed the ordinance of judge McConnell.
Lawyers representing the Trump administration argued that the limitation of funds was a lawful means of identifying and limiting alleged fraud.
Block FEMA grants
Two months after judge McConnell ordered the Trump administration to disappoint the financing of the States, he determined that the government had “secret” of the Millions of Dollars of FEMA funding in direct violation of a court order.
Judge McConnell ordered the Trump administration to “immediately stop” its efforts to hinder the disbursement of federal funds, noting that the government directly raped its order.
The United States Supreme Court was seen on April 7, 2025 in Washington.
Kayla Bartkowski / Getty Images
Last month, a coalition of 22 general prosecutors asked the McConnell judge to end the frost after presenting evidence that FEMA continued to restrict more than 215 federal subsidies despite an order of the court blocking the freezing of Trump’s unilateral financing.
The DOJ lawyers postponed the request, arguing that FEMA “simply implemented a manual examination process” of each subsidy.
Judge McConnell did not agree, concluding that the States had “undisputed evidence” that FEMA ” [imposed] An indefinite categorical break on payments “in direct violation of his preliminary injunction. He said that the manual examination process cited by the Trump administration” violates “a preliminary injunction issued in the case.
Foreign billions of foreign aid
A federal judge in February determined that the Trump administration was having little $ 2 billion in foreign aid despite the order to restore funding.
US district judge Amir H. Ali prevented the Trump administration from imposing a freeze on the American agency for international development, but freezing continued for weeks, according to lawyers representing non -profit organizations of foreign aid. Lawyers representing the Trump administration argued that the financing freezing was necessary to identify and block potential fraud.
In an order, judge Ali wrote that the Trump administration justified the frost by advancing “a frantic vision of the executive power that the Supreme Court has always rejected – a vision that flouts several laws”.
After the Trump administration called on the order, a supreme divided United States rejected the request to block the order, although the judges ordered the lower court to clarify its initial order.
