The Trump administration faces more legal setbacks after judges found the government illegally censored anti-ICE activists online and acted beyond its legal authority in trying to block doctors from delivering certain medical treatments to transgender kids.
The dual rulings are the latest in a tsunami of decisions hindering President Trump’s aggressive agenda.
Most of those rulings have come from Democrat-appointed judges who have been outspoken in their writing, accusing this administration of breaking legal norms.
U.S. District Judge Mustafa Kasubhai, a Biden appointee in Oregon, became the latest to do so in a ruling this weekend blocking a Health and Human Services Department declaration that it would try to stop federal money going to medical services that administer puberty blockers, cross-sex hormone treatment and surgery for children seeking to transition their gender identity.
He repeatedly accused Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. of an “unserious” approach to governance and he preemptively raised the prospect of holding the administration in contempt of court, saying he feared his orders would be ignored otherwise.
“As noted at oral argument, the court has observed that in the area of administrative law, a consistent theme has emerged in which agencies under the current administration have adopted a ‘break it and see if they can get away with it’ approach,” the judge wrote.
Judge Kasubhai, who makes a point to include pronouns “he/him” as part of his signature on case rulings, accused the Justice Department of a “bald-faced lie” and “attempts to gaslight” the court in its legal arguments by downplaying the importance of Mr. Kennedy’s declaration.
In another case, out of Illinois, U.S. District Judge Jorge Alonso, an Obama nominee, ordered the government to quit trying to block the social media posts and apps of activists who bird-dog U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement activities.
Government officials had said the Facebook group “ICE Sightings — Chicagoland” and the smartphone app “Eyes Up” were being used to “dox,” or reveal personal information about, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement personnel.
Then-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and then-Attorney General Pam Bondi both bragged about getting offending posts removed from the Facebook group and getting Eyes Up booted from Apple’s approved offerings. They suggested consequences if the firms didn’t cooperate.
Judge Alonso said that crossed constitutional lines
“They reached out to Facebook and Apple and demanded, rather than requested, that Facebook and Apple censor plaintiff’s speech,” the judge wrote.
He said Ms. Bondi compounded things by making “thinly veiled threats” suggesting prosecuting the tech firms for assisting in doxing.
Judge Alonso’s preliminary injunction, while a loss for the administration, was measured in tone compared to Judge Kasubhai, who cast the transgender medical treatment case as a symptom of a broader breakdown in the administration.
“The defendants’ unserious approach to governance stumbles far below the necessary commitment to a constitutional democracy that requires the rule of law to be regarded, respected and honored as sacred,” the judge scolded.
The Justice Department had argued Mr. Kennedy had a First Amendment right to ruminate on his thoughts on transgender treatment issues.
Judge Kasubhai was offended by that suggestion.
“Defendants cannot bully or gaslight this court into ignoring the many procedural and legal flaws of the Kennedy Declaration by invoking one of the most sacred principles of our constitutional democracy — the freedom of speech — when that principle comes nowhere close to being implicated,” he wrote.
A lengthy list of judges has complained that the Trump administration is breaking legal norms and defying orders. The chief federal judge in Minnesota in January counted more than 90 orders he said the government had violated in that court alone.
Trump lawyers have challenged those numbers but also argue ideologically antagonistic judges are crossing lines in their rush to rule against President Trump.
Indeed, a federal appeals court in Washington last week delivered a serious rebuke to one prominent Trump legal opponent, Judge James Boasberg, erasing his attempt to pursue criminal contempt of court against the president’s team.
