The echo of President Trump’s oath of office had barely subsided Monday when the first lawsuits were filed to derail his plans.
By midnight on his first day, Mr. Trump faced at least six lawsuits in federal court, and more followed on Tuesday.
His opponents include labor unions, immigrant rights groups, government watchdogs and a coalition of Democratic state attorneys general.
They have sued to stop his attempt to remake the federal bureaucracy, his Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency, and his executive order barring children born to illegal immigrants from being automatically granted citizenship, among others.
Trump opponents have also asked a judge to order the Department of Homeland Security to restore appointments that the administration canceled for a Biden-era catch-and-release “parole” program.
Ilya Somin, a law professor at George Mason University, said some challenges would fare better than others. He wasn’t surprised by Trump opponents’ rush through courthouse doors.
He said Mr. Trump made the readiness easy.
“I’m not surprised at all,” he said. “Many of these moves were telegraphed by Trump for months.”
Public Citizen was the first. At 12:02 p.m., moments after Mr. Trump took the oath of office, the nonprofit consumer advocacy organization filed a lawsuit against the Department of Government Efficiency in a federal district court in Washington.
Mr. Trump’s office is tasked with suggesting budget cuts and changes to the federal bureaucracy. The lawsuit argues that the DOGE is a federal commission and must comply with rules on transparency and balance of views.
Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen, said the organization had a good idea of what Mr. Trump intended to do with the DOGE, so its attorneys were prepared to file.
“The speed is directly connected to how obvious we felt it was that this is a federal advisory commission and our ability to pre-plan because of that,” she said.
Two other DOGE lawsuits were filed in Washington at 12:02 p.m., followed by a fourth at 12:08. A lawsuit filed late Monday night challenged Mr. Trump’s so-called Schedule F, an attempt to reel in civil service protections for government jobs that deal with policy.
Lawsuits have also been filed in federal courts in New Hampshire and Massachusetts challenging Mr. Trump’s attempt to block children born to illegal immigrants and temporary visitors from gaining automatic U.S. citizenship.
The challenges hark back to Mr. Trump’s first term when he attempted aggressive policies through executive action.
Attempts to strip federal funding from sanctuary cities, to end Temporary Protected Status designations that granted a deportation amnesty to hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants, and to end the Obama-era DACA program that protected hundreds of thousands of “Dreamers” all fared poorly in the courts.
His move to tap Pentagon funds to build the border wall and the third iteration of his travel ban survived challenges.
Immigration attracted some of the early lawsuits this time.
A coalition of Democratic attorneys general and immigration rights groups representing pregnant migrant women sued over the birthright citizenship changes.
“The president has no authority to rewrite or nullify a constitutional amendment or duly enacted statute. Nor is he empowered by any other source of law to limit who receives United States citizenship at birth,” the state lawsuit says.
Mr. Somin said the challenge is likely on solid ground. He called Mr. Trump’s attempt to alter automatic citizenship “blatantly unconstitutional.”
Josh Blackman, a professor at South Texas College of Law, said the lawsuits are premature because Mr. Trump’s changes don’t take effect until 30 days after his order.
He said those who challenged the DOGE may have prematurely opposed the federal advisory commission. Mr. Trump’s executive order establishes it as an office within the White House, disrupting the arguments.
“They are going to have to start from scratch,” he said.
Mr. Somin was less confident about how the courts would approach Mr. Trump’s attempt to use the Alien Enemies Act, a 1798 law that allows the arrest and deportation of noncitizens deemed national security risks.
Mr. Trump has said he wants to use the law to weed out cartel operatives and members of MS-13 and Tren de Aragua, two gangs with roots in Latin America that have infiltrated U.S. communities.
He said he thinks Mr. Trump is stretching the law, which requires a war or threat of invasion by a foreign power to be triggered.
He said some judges might, in his view wrongly, defer to Mr. Trump’s decision that a border emergency exists.
Fighting all the lawsuits could prove taxing for the Justice Department, particularly if judges speed the cases.
That played out Tuesday before a judge in Washington, where the ACLU asked him to order the government to restore appointments for a Biden-era border catch-and-release “parole” program.
The Trump team ended the use of the CBP One app to facilitate the program, but the ACLU said people who already had appointments scheduled shouldn’t be affected.
The ACLU asked for a fast briefing schedule and ruling.
“This is a matter of some urgency,” attorney Lee Gelernt said.
Justice Department lawyer Erez Reuveni told the judge that they were still analyzing all the new Trump changes to see how they affect existing programs.
“We just don’t know that yet,” he said.
• Stephen Dinan can be reached at sdinan@washingtontimes.com.