Lawfare Daily: The Trials of the Trump Administration, March 28
Mar 31, 2025
auto_awesome
David Cole, former ACLU National Legal Director and constitutional law expert, dives into the complex legal landscape shaped by Trump’s executive actions. He discusses the implications of the Alien Enemies Act and how it affects deportations, especially concerning individuals like Mahmoud Khalil. The conversation touches on First Amendment rights during national emergencies and the chilling effects on universities and law firms. Cole also unpacks issues around birthright citizenship and the ongoing challenges in immigration law—shedding light on the intersection of legality, civil liberties, and national security.
The dismantling of USAID within the State Department raises profound legal questions and implications for international aid and U.S. foreign policy.
Ongoing litigation regarding the Alien Enemies Act highlights tensions between constitutional rights and national security claims in immigration cases.
Legal disputes over federal funding cutbacks reflect deep political divisions, impacting diversity initiatives and broader social policy objectives across the country.
Deep dives
Dismantling USAID and Legal Challenges
The Trump administration has announced the dismantling of USAID, consolidating it within the State Department, which has profound implications for international aid and U.S. foreign policy. This shift has already prompted various legal challenges, as employees and affiliated organizations contest the legitimacy of this move. The litigation raises questions about the authority to reorganize or eliminate federal agencies, particularly under the Administrative Procedures Act, with prior attempts to pause such actions resulting in temporary restraining orders. Notably, the speed of this dismantling process may exacerbate ongoing legal battles, as affected individuals seek remedies for their job losses and the overall impact on vital global funding initiatives.
Litigation Surrounding the Alien Enemies Act
Current legal battles center on the application of the Alien Enemies Act, which has sparked controversy regarding constitutional rights. Recent court decisions have favored plaintiffs seeking to challenge deportations under this act, with specific cases examining the legality of detaining individuals based solely on unfavorable government claims. Procedural argumentation has emerged, primarily questioning the right venue for such cases and whether habeas corpus is the appropriate judicial avenue. The complexities surrounding jurisdiction and government definitions of national security continue to complicate these proceedings, highlighting strident debates over executive power and individual rights.
First Amendment Rights and Immigration Cases
The First Amendment's application to non-citizens is under scrutiny in ongoing immigration litigation, particularly concerning the deportation of individuals based on their speech and political views. Cases involving lawful permanent residents and students who expressed dissenting opinions illustrate tensions between free speech rights and national security claims made by the government. Legal experts argue that the government's attempts to suppress dissent through deportations evoke significant constitutional questions about the rights of immigrants residing in the U.S. Courts have been challenged to balance national security interests with the fundamental rights guaranteed to individuals within American borders.
Impact of Federal Funding Cutbacks
Federal funding cutbacks have led to multiple legal disputes across various states, as entities fight for the restoration of grants and assistance that have been halted. Recent court rulings have temporarily reinstated funding for specific organizations, though challenges remain regarding the overall process and transparency of such funding decisions. These funding disputes often reflect deeper political and ideological divisions, especially concerning policies related to diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. Ongoing litigation around these issues signals potential ripple effects impacting not only funding but also broader social policy objectives across the country.
Controversies Surrounding University Foundations
Universities are facing legal pressures as federal authorities target institutions over their policies and practices concerning free speech and diversity initiatives. High-profile cases involving Columbia University and the University of Pennsylvania showcase how government actions threaten to destabilize funding and support for academic institutions. These lawsuits challenge the legality of funding cutbacks conditioned on alleged failures to address political grievances and student activism. Ongoing concerns about academic freedom and institutional autonomy underscore the precarious situation facing universities in an increasingly polarized political environment.
On March 28, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes will sit down with Lawfare Senior Editors Scott Anderson, Anna Bower, and Roger Parloff, Lawfare Contributing Editor James Pearce, and former ACLU National Legal Director David Cole to discuss the status of the civil litigation against President Trump’s executive actions, including the deportation of individuals under the Alien Enemies Act, the detention of Mahmoud Khalil, and the targeting of law firms.
