Key facts
- Reuters identified 75 federal judge rulings finding Donald Trump's administration infringed on First Amendment rights.
- These rulings covered freedoms of speech, religion, and the press.
- Judges found the administration retaliated against individuals and groups opposing its agenda.
- Decisions against the administration were issued by judges appointed by both Democratic and Republican presidents.
- The Trump administration appealed about two-thirds of the adverse rulings, succeeding in overturning or holding some.
- Critics compare Trump's actions to suppress speech to those of Woodrow Wilson during the First Red Scare.
U.S. President Donald Trump, who campaigned on a promise to restore free speech and end government censorship, faces a significant number of court rulings concluding his administration infringed upon First Amendment rights. Reuters identified 75 federal judge rulings that found the Trump administration violated constitutional grounds, impacting freedoms of speech, religion, and the press.
These rulings indicated that the administration had chilled or suppressed the speech of citizens and groups opposing its agenda. U.S. District Judge William Young, appointed by Republican President Ronald Reagan, stated that the President's misunderstanding of government's inability to retaliate for disfavored speech poses a threat to Americans' freedom of speech. Specific instances cited include the illegal detention and deportation of foreign students for pro-Palestinian advocacy, termination of university grants for refusing to align with ideological agendas, retaliation against law firms for their legal work, and the use of excessive force at protests.
Trump administration officials have frequently labeled judges who ruled against them as "activists" interfering with executive authority. White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson criticized the rulings, stating the judiciary endangered and obstructed the election choices of the American people. These 75 cases were part of 93 where judges addressed First Amendment arguments during Trump's term, with rulings against the administration coming from judges appointed by both Democrats and Republicans. Notably, Republican appointees delivered decisions in 10 of these cases.
In comparison, the Biden administration faced 27 cases with First Amendment challenges during its term, with judges ruling against it in 13 instances, primarily concerning vaccine mandates challenged on religious-freedom grounds. Reuters compiled this data by searching federal court records, consolidating similar lawsuits, and excluding cases by self-represented litigants. Some rulings were preliminary, and the administration appealed about two-thirds of the adverse decisions.
The Trump administration successfully persuaded courts to overturn or put on hold 15 of the 75 rulings. However, two appeals courts overturned lower-court decisions regarding pro-Palestinian campus activists, finding the lower courts lacked jurisdiction without ruling on the merits. In another appeal, the administration won a case that allowed it to strip federal workers of union bargaining abilities, with judges determining the action would have been taken regardless of intent to punish unions. Conversely, an appeal upheld a ruling that terminating federal grants for researchers constituted viewpoint discrimination.
Critics, such as William & Mary Law School professor Timothy Zick, argue that Trump's actions to suppress speech are the most sweeping since President Woodrow Wilson's First Red Scare, noting that Trump operates in a context where First Amendment boundaries are clearer. A Washington federal appeals court is expected to uphold lower court decisions against Trump's campaign targeting law firms and lawyers, including a ruling by U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell that castigated Trump for suspending a law firm's security clearances based on its past work for his political opponents.