In the almost three months since the inauguration of President Donald Trump, lawyers who defy their actions in court have alleged that their administration has violated judicial orders in half a dozen occasions, according to the judicial records reviewed by ABC News.
From the unilateral freezing of federal funds to the use of Alien enemies law to deport non -citizens, clashes have expressed concerns about the separation of powers and the potential of a constitutional crisis.
The plaintiffs who demand the Trump administration have claimed that the Government violated or ignored the judicial orders on at least six different occasions, but so far no judge has kept a member of the Trump administration in contempt of the court. On at least four occasions, the judges have expressed concern about the fulfillment of the Trump administration with the judicial orders.
President Donald Trump speaks while he meets with President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador at the Oval Office of the White House, on April 14, 2025 in Washington.
Kevin Lamarque/Reuters
The lawyers of the Department of Justice have strongly defended the actions of the Trump administration and argued that federal officials have strictly complied with legal judicial orders, while questioning the legality of some orders. Each of the cases is ongoing or appealed, so the orders of the District Court can be emptied as the higher courts intervene.
Trump has repeatedly promised to respect a court order even if a judge governs against parts of his agenda, although he has tried to question the authority of some judges.
“Well, always comply with the courts and then I will have to appeal it,” Trump told Rachel Scott of ABC in February, referring to cases involving the efficiency department of Elon Musk’s government. In those cases, Trump suggested that the order of a judge “decelerated the impulse, and gives the crooked people more time to cover the books. You know, if a person is crooked and caught it, other people see that and, suddenly, it becomes more difficult later.”
The Trump administration now possibly faces its legal battle plus high profile, since it tries to keep Kilmar Abrego García in saving custody despite the fact that the Supreme Court ordered its administration to facilitate its release.
Use of the Alien enemies Law to eliminate the alleged train members of Aragua
Last month, the Trump Administration took more than 100 alleged members of the Venezuelan Train of Aragua to a saving prison under the Alien Enemies Law despite a federal judge who ordered him to return him to the United States
Photo without a date provided by the United States District Court for the Maryland district, a man identified by Jennifer Vásquez Sura when her husband, Kilmar Abrego García, is directed by force by the guards through the Center for Confinement of Terrorism in Tecolluca, El Salvador.
United States District Court for the Maryland district through AP
The American district judge James Boasberg issued a directive that two planes that lead men to El Salvador to be returned to the United States on March 15. Although both planes are still in the air at the time of order, the planes landed in Honduras before flying to El Salvador.
The lawyers representing Venezuelan men have argued that the Trump administration violated the court order, and Judge James Boasberg commented that the government “acted in bad faith” when deportation flights hurried.
On this March 16, 2023, File Photo, Judge James E. Boasberg, main judge of the Federal District Court in DC, represents a portrait at E. Barrett Prettyman Federal Courthouse in Washington, DC
Carolyn Van Houten/The Washington Post through Getty Images, Archive
The Supreme Court annulled its order to block any future moving under the Alien Enemies Law because the plaintiffs lacked jurisdiction to present a case in DC before the decision of the Supreme Court, Judge Boasberg was considering starting the contempt procedures.
Trump defended his use of the Alien enemies law, telling journalists last month that the authority has to eliminate non -citizens under the law, and has repeatedly criticized Judge Boasberg for blocking removals.
“[Secretary of State Marco Rubio has] The authority to get bad people out of our country. And he cannot stop that with a judge sitting behind a bank that has no idea what happens, which turns out to be a radical left lunatic, “Trump told Karen Travers de ABC.
Kilmar elimination Abrego Garcia
After the Trump administration recognized that he had deported a Salvadoran native who lived in Maryland under the protected legal status due to an “administrative error”, a federal judge ordered the Government to facilitate his return to the United States.
Photo without a date provided by House, an immigrant defense organization, in April 2025, shows Kilmar Abrego García.
House through AP
After the Trump administration appealed the decision, the United States Supreme Court concluded that Judge Paula Xinis “correctly” required that the United States facilitated the release of Abrego García from the saving custody; However, the Superior Court ordered Judge Xinis to determine what “deference” is due to Trump related to his foreign affairs conduct.
Since the ruling of the Supreme Court, the Trump Administration has doubled its accusation that Abrego García is a member of MS-13, without providing any evidence, and said that he lacks the authority to return it to the United States during a meeting with Trump in the Oval office on Monday, President Salvador
“The question is absurd. How can I smuggle a terrorist to the United States?” Bukele said.
Benjamin Osorio, Abrego García’s lawyer, told ABC News that he believes that the Trump administration is challenging the court order and that a contempt order could be the only thing that leads to the United States government to return to its client in El Salvador.
Before his meeting with Bukele, Trump told journalists that he would respect an order from the Supreme Court to return to Abrego García.
President Donald Trump meets with the president of El Salvador, Nayib Bukele, at the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, on April 14, 2025.
Kevin Lamarque/Reuters
“If the Supreme Court said to bring someone back, I would do it. I respect the Supreme Court,” Trump said.
Elimination of migrants to third countries
During a hearing last week, a federal judge granted lawyers with the Department of Justice for two weeks to provide more information about three recent non -citizens removals to El Salvador that took place two days after issuing a temporary order that blocks deportations similar to countries other than their place of origin without a hearing to raise concerns about their safety.
Judge Brian Murphy described the “possible violations of the temporary restriction order” as “worrying” and established an April 28 hearing for more information about deportations.
“This is something that worries me,” said Judge Murphy. “I think it’s something we must address.”
The lawyers of the Department of Justice agreed to provide more information about the removals and defended the behavior of the administration.
Judge Murphy is considering extending his court order that prevents the Trump administration from eliminating non -citizens to countries other than their place of origin without allowing non -citizens to generate concerns about their safety.
Two days after Judge Murphy temporarily blocked the deportations, the Trump administration announced that it had eliminated 17 alleged train members of Aragua and MS-13 to the notorious prison of Cecot of El Salvador. According to the plaintiffs, some of the men on those flights had final orders of extraction to Venezuela and were never given the right to challenge their extraction to El Salvador.
Financing unilaterally frozen to states
In February, the United States District Judge, John McConnell, said that a group of state general prosecutors presented evidence that the Trump administration “continued to incorrect federal funds incorrectly and refused to resume the disbursement of appropriate federal funds” to the States despite a “clear and unnecessary” order that prevented them from blocking the funds.
He ordered the Government to “restore frozen financing,” although the state attorney general later provided evidence that the Trump administration continued to stop the FEMA financing. Many of the financing currents were restored in the months after the order of Judge McConnell.
The lawyers representing the Trump administration have argued that the limitation of the funds was a legal way to identify and limit the alleged fraud.
FEMA subsidies blockade
Two months after Judge McConnell ordered the Trump administration to defrost the funds for the states, he determined that the government “covertly” stopped millions of dollars in FEMA funds in direct violation of a court order.
Judge McConnell ordered the Trump administration to “immediately cease” their efforts to prevent the disbursement of federal funds, finding that the government directly violated its order.
The United States Supreme Court is seen on April 7, 2025 in Washington.
Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images
Last month, a coalition of 22 general prosecutors asked Judge McConnell to stop the freezing after they presented evidence that FEMA continued to restrict more than 215 federal subsidies despite a court order that blocks Trump’s unilateral financing freezing.
The lawyers with the Department of Justice retreated the request, arguing that FEMA was “simply implementing a manual review process” of each subsidy.
Judge McConnell did not agre [imposed] An indefinite categorical pause on payments “in direct violation of its preliminary court order. He said that the manual review process cited by the Trump administration” violates “a preliminary judicial order issued in the case.
Freeze billions in foreign aid
A federal judge in February determined that the Trump administration was inappropriate almost $ 2 billion in foreign aid despite the order to restore funds.
The American district judge Amir H. Ali blocked the Trump administration to impose a general freezing on the funds of the United States Agency for International Development, however, freezing continued for weeks, according to lawyers representing non -profit organizations for foreign aid. Lawyers representing the Trump administration have argued that the freezing of funds was necessary to identify and block potential fraud.
In an order, Judge Ali wrote that the Trump administration justified the freezing as “an unbridled vision of the Executive Power that the Supreme Court has constantly rejected, an opinion that mocks multiple statutes.”
After the Trump administration appealed the order, a Supreme Court of the United States divided the request to block the order, although the judges ordered the lower court to clarify its original order.
