The Trump administration has been accused of repeatedly failing to comply with lower court rulings across a wide range of policy areas, including immigration, deportations, federal spending cuts and mass layoffs, according to a review of court records cited by The Associated Press (AP).
The AP review found that in the first 15 months of President Donald Trump’s second term, federal district judges ruled the administration had violated court orders in at least 31 lawsuits. This represents roughly one in eight cases in which courts had temporarily blocked government actions.
One such case involved a ruling last December in which a federal judge struck down a policy of holding immigrants without bond. Despite the decision, a senior Justice Department official reportedly argued the ruling was not binding, and detainees continued to be denied release.
By February, US District Judge Sunshine Sykes expressed strong concern over the administration’s conduct. She accused officials of attempting “to erode any semblance of separation of powers,” adding that they could “only do so in a world where the Constitution does not exist.”
The administration has also faced more than 250 additional findings of noncompliance in individual immigration-related cases, including failure to release detainees and return seized property.
Legal experts and former judges said such levels of defiance are highly unusual compared to previous administrations. Ryan Goodman, a law professor at New York University, said, “What the court system is experiencing in the last year and a half is just qualitatively completely different from anything that’s preceded it.”
Georgetown University constitutional law scholar David Super warned that weakening adherence to court rulings could have wider consequences, saying, “The federal government should be the institution most devoted to the rule of law in this country. When it ceases to feel itself bound, respect for the rule of law is likely to break down across the country.”
According to the AP review, higher courts, including the Supreme Court, have overturned or limited lower court rulings in nearly half of the cases, a factor critics say may be encouraging the administration’s stance.
White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson defended the administration, stating that higher courts had overturned “unlawful district court rulings.” She added, “The administration will continue to comply with lawful court rulings.”
Among disputed cases are alleged violations involving deportations to El Salvador, delays in restoring funding for Voice of America, and restrictions on foreign aid.
Some judges have used strong language in their rulings. One described government actions as “ham-handed,” while another accused officials of “hallucinating new text” in legal interpretations.
The Justice Department has rejected claims of widespread noncompliance, arguing in court filings that it has acted within legal limits and appealed unfavorable rulings.
However, critics including advocacy groups tracking the cases argue that selective compliance undermines judicial authority and risks normalizing defiance of court orders.
The dispute highlights growing tensions between the executive branch and the judiciary amid broader political and legal battles over presidential authority and the limits of executive power.
