Trump turns to Supreme Court as judges reject administration’s view of presidential power

The Justice Department has submitted multiple filings with the Supreme Court that accuse federal judges of abusing their constitutional powers, while lower courts criticized the Trump administration’s expansive view of presidential power.

The administration asked the high court to intervene in three cases it argues are hampering President Donald Trump’s agenda, including one where it’s been ordered to rehire thousands of dismissed federal workers.

The latest filing, on Friday, focuses on the administration’s complaints about a judge who temporarily halted deportations under Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act, a rarely used 18th-century wartime law. Attorneys argued that the judge overstepped his authority, and complained about the overall number of temporary restraining orders imposed by federal judges as a result of legal challenges to Trump’s sweeping agenda.

The third case where the administration sought Supreme Court intervention involves millions of dollars in education grants that were abruptly canceled by Trump officials. After a federal judge in Massachusetts ordered the Education Department to temporarily make the payments while the plaintiffs’ lawsuit proceeds, the administration petitioned the Supreme Court in a filing that argued the justices should “put a swift end to federal district courts’ unconstitutional reign as self-appointed managers of Executive Branch funding and grant-disbursement decisions.”

Trump setbacks extend to appeals courts

After numerous rulings against the Trump administration at the district court level, the Justice Department hasn’t had much success with the appeals courts either.

The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for D.C. rejected Trump’s assertion that judges don’t have the power to review his use of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan immigrants whom officials allege are members of a gang. The three-judge panel ruled that a judge’s ban temporarily barring such deportations could remain in place.

At a hearing in the case on Monday, one of the appeals court judges, Patricia Millett, also raised due process concerns, noting that the administration hadn’t allowed deportees to challenge accusations that they’re affiliated with the gang before being shipped off to a prison in El Salvador.

“Nazis got better treatment under the Alien Enemy Act” the last time it was invoked, which was during World War II, Millett said.

At the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday, judges declined to block a preliminary injunction ordering thousands of fired probationary workers to be reinstated.

Both rulings were 2-1 decisions, and the dissenting judge in each case was a Trump appointee from his first term.

Meanwhile, the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied the administration’s bid to block a court order halting a partial federal funding freeze it had tried to implement. The ruling was unanimous, 3-0. The administration had sought to block a preliminary injunction barring the freeze from going into effect during the appeals process.

The week did end with a win for the administration. The D.C. appeals court temporarily paused two lower court rulings that had reinstated Cathy Harris to the Merit Systems Protection Board and Gwynne Wilcox to the National Labor Relations Board. Trump had directed that both should be fired.

Transgender military ban blocked — twice

Federal judges in two different states issued rulings preventing the Defense Department from implementing new guidance that would effectively bar transgender service members from serving in the military.

In a stinging ruling, U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes denied the administration’s request to vacate her earlier preliminary injunction. It contended that guidance from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth barred people with “gender dysphoria — a medical condition — and does not discriminate against trans-identifying persons as a class.”

The judge said she didn’t buy that argument.

“Defendants cannot evade discriminating against transgender people simply by labeling the policy as addressing gender dysphoria,” she wrote.

“A medical condition has not given its country decades of military service. Or deployed into combat zones throughout the globe. Or earned countless commendations. People have. A medical condition has not fought terrorism. Or analyzed intelligence. Or commanded platoons. People have. A medical condition has not been accused of lacking warrior ethos. Or been branded dishonorable, dishonest, and undisciplined. Or been threatened with the loss of livelihood. People have,” she writes. “Transgender people.”

Reyes’ sentiments were echoed in a preliminary injunction issued in Washington state in another case brought on behalf of transgender service members who are facing the possibility of being discharged.

The newly issued “Hegseth Policy scrupulously avoids using the word ‘transgender’ — the word does not appear in the Hegseth Policy. But common sense and binding authority defeat the government’s claim that it does not discriminate against transgender people,” U.S. District Judge Benjamin Settle wrote.

The administration is appealing both decisions.

Signal chat debacle enters the courts

U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, who has been presiding over the Alien Enemies Act case, heard arguments in another hot-button case this week: the administration’s use of the messaging app Signal to discuss the details of a U.S. military strike in Yemen before it occurred. The group chat came to light when the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic was accidentally included in the chat, which appeared to include Hegseth, Vice President JD Vance, national security adviser Mike Waltz, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent.

Boasberg issued an order directing the federal agencies involved in the chat to “preserve all Signal communications between March 11 and March 15,” around the time of the strike.

The order came in response to a lawsuit filed by the watchdog group American Oversight, which said it’s seeking to ensure the communications are preserved in compliance with the Federal Records Act.

The Treasury Department said it already located some of the messages, and the Defense Department indicated it was already working on complying.

The judge directed the administration to file a status report by Monday.