Federal judges around the country have raised alarms in recent months about the Trump administration's failure to follow their orders in individual immigration cases.
An Associated Press review of court records shows Trump officials have also racked up an extraordinary record of defiance in a much broader set of lawsuits dating back to the first days of President Donald Trump's second term.
Since February 2025, district court judges have ruled the Republican
administration was violating an order in at least 31 lawsuits over a wide range of issues, including cuts in federal funding, mass layoffs, deportations, and immigration practices.
These violations are in addition to more than 250 instances of noncompliance judges have recently highlighted in individual immigration petitions — from failing to return property to keeping immigrants locked up past court-ordered release dates.
Though Trump officials eventually backed down in about a third of the 31 cases, legal experts say their treatment of court orders damages the constitutional system of checks and balances.
“The federal government should be the institution most devoted to the rule of law in this country,” said David Super, a constitutional law scholar at Georgetown University. “When it ceases to feel itself bound, respect for the rule of law is likely to break down across the country.”
Here are some key takeaways from AP's report on these cases:
The administration has already faced more than 700 lawsuits.
The AP reviewed hundreds of pages of court documents in noncompliance cases compiled by nonpartisan government watchdogs. It found additional cases by scouring media reports of violations and then verifying the findings with court records.
District courts have also found previous administrations in violation of their orders.
But legal scholars and former federal judges said they could recall at most a few cases over the full four-year terms of other recent presidents — including the first Trump administration and Presidents Joe Biden and Barack Obama.
White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said district court judges were making “unlawful” rulings against Trump officials.
“President Trump’s entire Administration is lawfully implementing the America First agenda he was elected to enact,” she said in a written statement.
In court filings, Justice Department attorneys have generally disputed accusations the government was not complying. They have argued over the meaning of words, cited favorable appellate court rulings and said they were acting outside the scope of the court’s order, among other legal maneuvering.
Outside of court, Trump and White House officials have railed against federal judges, and Vice President JD Vance has even suggested the president could ignore court orders.
The groups that say they’ve been harmed by the administration’s failure to comply with court orders are varied and include immigrants, nonprofits and journalists.
Among other instances of noncompliance, judges found the White House defied rulings when it deported scores of accused gang members to a notorious prison in El Salvador, withheld billions of dollars in foreign aid and failed to restore programming at the Voice of America. The three cases date to the first few months of the new administration, but judges have continued to find violations since then, including in two cases in April.
In 15 of the 31 lawsuits the AP reviewed, an appellate court or the Supreme Court either allowed the administration’s underlying policy, limited the district court’s efforts to correct or punish the noncompliance, or both.
Those decisions show lower court judges are overreaching, said Will Chamberlain, senior counsel with the conservative legal advocacy group The Article III Project.
Trump officials are “generally complying, appealing and winning,” he said. “If they were defying orders left and right, they’d be losing them.”
Critics say the higher courts are excusing noncompliance.
“This is not the first time the Court closes its eyes to noncompliance, nor, I fear, will it be the last,” Supreme Court Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in June in a dissent joined by the court’s two other liberal justices. “Yet each time this Court rewards noncompliance with discretionary relief, it further erodes respect for courts and for the rule of law.”
