Live tracking of lawsuits, injunctions, and legal actions to restore federal information access
This legal challenges tracker is actively being developed and verified. Case details and documentation are being cross-referenced with court records, legal databases, and advocacy organization reports. Some information may be incomplete pending verification.
📊 Broader Legal Context: According to Lawfare's litigation tracker, there are currently 321 active cases challenging Trump administration actions across all policy areas. This tracker focuses specifically on federal information access and transparency cases that affect public data, research, and government accountability.
Court granted stay blocking Trump administration CHNV parole program changes, finding DHS exceeded statutory authority under the Administrative Procedure Act.
District Court dismissed AFGE's challenge to Trump administration executive orders affecting federal workforce. The court granted defendants' motion to dismiss and denied plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment. Case is terminated but may be appealed.
Project on Government Oversight challenges multiple entities under the Department of Government Efficiency umbrella for transparency and accountability violations. This case is critical for establishing oversight requirements for DOGE operations and ensuring public access to information about government efficiency initiatives that affect federal operations and transparency.
SUMMARY JUDGMENT VICTORY: Federal court ruled that removal of health webpages violated the Administrative Procedure Act. Judge Bates found the content removal was "arbitrary and capricious" and ordered immediate restoration.
AGENCIES BOUND BY COURT ORDER: CDC, FDA, NIH, CMS, HRSA, AHRQ, SAMHSA, National Center for Health Statistics, and Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
ACTIVE COMPLIANCE ENFORCEMENT: Court maintains oversight with weekly status reports. Three compliance spreadsheets filed showing measurable restoration progress across federal health agencies.
LEGAL PRECEDENT: Establishes that rapid executive removal of scientific and health content without proper administrative procedures violates federal law and can be successfully challenged in federal court.
Reproductive health services, family planning resources, and healthcare access - challenging HHS Secretary Kennedy's policies affecting reproductive healthcare access and federal family planning programs.
Administrative procedures affecting victim rights, Title IX enforcement data, campus safety resources, and educational compliance information - likely challenging DOE data removal and procedural changes.
Challenges NIH directives that led to elimination of critical research programs and data access. Federal court struck down NIH's unlawful directives affecting humanities research and academic access to federal resources.
Challenge to Florida's 2022 congressional districting plan under the Fair Districts Amendment. Plaintiffs argued the plan violated the state constitution by eliminating a North Florida district where black voters could "elect representatives of their choice." Court ruled that federal Equal Protection Clause prohibits the racially gerrymandered district plaintiffs demanded.
Nature of Suit: Administrative Procedure Act/Review or Appeal of Agency Decision (Nature of Suit Code 899)
Plaintiffs: Massachusetts, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, plus Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro
Defendants: Donald J. Trump, Attorney General Pamela Bondi, United States Department of Justice
Case Exhibits: White House Press Release, Gender Identity Order, "Denial of Care" Order, Bondi Directive, Shumate Directive - demonstrating coordinated federal policy targeting transgender healthcare access.
This landmark habeas corpus case successfully challenged Trump's invocation of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act against "Tren De Aragua" members. Judge Haines GRANTED preliminary injunction requiring 21-day notice and due process protections before removals. The court found that "notice roughly 24 hours before removal, devoid of information about how to exercise due process rights...surely does not pass muster." Major ACLU victory with extensive legal team.
Legal challenge to state policies with federal implications. The TRO provides immediate relief while broader constitutional and civil rights issues are litigated. This case demonstrates successful emergency legal intervention to protect rights pending full judicial review.
Critical law enforcement accountability databases, misconduct tracking systems, and transparency tools that enable public oversight of federal law enforcement agencies. CREW's lawsuit challenges restrictions that limit public access to information essential for democratic accountability and civil rights monitoring.
Federal medical and public health innovation research funding threatened by Trump administration cuts. Massachusetts AG Campbell secured nationwide preliminary injunction protecting research programs critical to public health infrastructure and medical innovation nationwide.
CREW is investigating communications regarding DHS compliance with court orders related to removal operations. This FOIA targets Acting General Counsel Joseph Mazzara's communications during the critical March 2025 period when whistleblower Erez Reuveni disclosed potential violations of court injunctions affecting removal flights and inter-agency coordination.
This DOD FOIA specifically investigates whether DHS properly communicated court injunction requirements to DOD officials. According to Reuveni's disclosure, Acting GC Young allegedly told him that "DHS had not communicated the existence of the injunction with any DOD official" - this FOIA seeks to verify that claim and document any communication failures between agencies regarding court-ordered restrictions on removal operations.
Critical state court hearing on election authority and county recorder powers - impacts 2026 election preparedness for Arizona's largest county
Maricopa County Recorder Justin Heap (R) is suing to reclaim election management responsibilities and funding that were ceded to the Board of Supervisors in an agreement before he took office. The case involves statutory authority over election administration, IT infrastructure, and funding - with potential impacts on the county's preparedness for 2026 elections. Heap claims the Board is trying to unlawfully seize "near-total control" over election administration.
Three-day trial on constitutional challenge to federal deployment of California National Guard for immigration enforcement - major 10th Amendment and federalism case
California challenges Trump's federalization of 4,000 National Guard members for immigration enforcement in Los Angeles. The case involves critical constitutional issues: whether the President properly invoked 10 U.S.C. § 12406, compliance with the Posse Comitatus Act, and 10th Amendment limits on federal commandeering of state forces. District court initially found Trump exceeded his authority, but 9th Circuit stayed the injunction pending appeal. This trial will determine the constitutional limits on federal deployment of state National Guard for domestic law enforcement.
Constitutional Challenge: Eight federal Inspectors General challenge their removal by Trump administration, arguing it violates statutory protections and separation of powers principles that ensure independent oversight of federal agencies.
Plaintiffs: Robert P. Storch (DOD IG), Michael J. Missal (VA IG), Christi A. Grimm (HHS IG), Phyllis K. Fong (SBA IG), Larry D. Turner (Labor IG), Hannibal "Mike" Ware (Railroad Retirement Board IG), Cardell K. Richardson Sr. (Tennessee Valley Authority IG), Sandra D. Bruce (USDA IG)
Defendants: Pete Hegseth (Defense Secretary), Marco Rubio (State Secretary), Donald J. Trump, and other cabinet officials
Legal Theory: Inspector General Act requires "cause" for removal and advance notice to Congress. Mass firings without proper procedures undermine congressional oversight and government transparency.
CASA Inc. challenges DHS Secretary Kristi Noem's immigration policy changes that affect community-based immigration services and support programs. The case focuses on procedural violations in implementing policy changes that impact immigrant communities and service organizations.
HHS Secretary Kennedy's admission that "we were not able to perform our job" without the fired staff exposes the chaos of DOGE workforce cuts. This FOIA investigates the decision-making process that led to mass firings followed by emergency rehiring of 722 CDC and NIH employees, potentially compromising public health mission continuity and expertise retention.
Rapid Settlement: Federal government and Texas reached consent judgment within hours of filing, suggesting pre-negotiated agreement outside public view.
Student Organizations Fighting Back: Students for Affordable Tuition, Austin Community College, and La Union del Pueblo Entero filed extensive legal briefs challenging the settlement, suggesting it affects DACA recipients, student aid access, or educational immigration programs.
Active Appeals: Currently on appeal to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals with two separate notices of appeal filed August 4, 2025, indicating significant legal resources being deployed by educational institutions.
Transparency Concerns: The same-day settlement raises questions about public input on immigration enforcement agreements that could affect thousands of students and educational access programs.
With 1,214 confirmed measles cases and America's first measles deaths in a decade, the US is losing its measles elimination status. Medical experts cite CDC's "ineffective vaccine messaging," staff cuts hampering outbreak response, and scrapped school intervention plans. This expedited FOIA investigates whether CDC is properly safeguarding Americans during this preventable public health crisis.
Constitutional rights violation challenge under federal question jurisdiction. Washington State is challenging Trump administration actions affecting constitutional protections, likely including federal information access, civil rights enforcement, or federal program changes affecting state residents.
Administrative Procedure Act challenge to federal agency decision-making processes. California joins multiple states challenging agency actions under the APA's "arbitrary and capricious" standard, focusing on procedural violations in federal administrative decisions affecting state interests.
Equity Assistance Center (EAC) grants for technical assistance in federal school desegregation cases across "Region I" (Connecticut, Delaware, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, Vermont). Court found DOE's termination was "arbitrary and capricious" under the Administrative Procedure Act.
💳 PACER Access Problem:
Federal court records cost $0.10/page ($30 minimum quarterly) - this paywall prevents public verification of legal challenges, which is itself a transparency crisis.
Realistic Free Source Hierarchy:
This verification challenge demonstrates why we need better public access to court records.