A legal expert has warned that the Trump administration is weaponizing a new legal tool aimed at discouraging legal challenges, CNN reported on Thursday. The White House issued a memo to agency leaders announcing a new policy that could significantly impact lawsuits against the federal government.
The memo states, “It is the policy of the United States to demand that parties seeking injunctions against the Federal Government must cover the costs and damages incurred if the Government is ultimately found to have been wrongfully enjoined or restrained.” The document further asserts, “Federal courts should hold litigants accountable for their misrepresentations and ill-granted injunctions.”
More: VP J.D. Vance Sparks Controversy with Comments on Potential U.S. Military Action in Mexico
More: Elon Musk’s AI Chatbot Grok Claims ‘75-85% Likelihood’ Trump is a Putin Asset
Legal experts say the requirement for up-front payments in lawsuits is unprecedented in courts across the country. Many view it as a strategic move to deter lawsuits against the Trump administration. “It is a very bold move that violates norms,” attorney Mark Zaid told CNN. “This is going to be thrown open to the courts … Theoretically, this could be an incredibly powerful tool for the Trump administration.”
Zaid noted that the administration often seeks loopholes to make it harder for legal challenges to proceed. However, in this case, “they actually have identified something that on its face looks to be a utility to rely upon.” The timing of the memo is significant, as nearly 100 emergency lawsuits have been filed in federal courts against the Trump administration.
These lawsuits primarily target changes in immigration and diversity policies, budget freezes, federal employee dismissals, and initiatives led by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency. Legal analysts suggest that the new policy could have a chilling effect on future lawsuits, discouraging individuals and organizations from challenging government actions due to the financial risks involved.
More: Trump’s Trade Chaos Continues as He Flip-Flops on Mexico Tariffs Again
More: Marjorie Taylor Greene Defends Elon Musk’s Government Cuts, Tells GOP to ‘Grow a Backbone’
Critics argue that the measure undermines the principle of equal access to justice and could disproportionately affect smaller advocacy groups and individuals with limited resources. As the courts assess the legality of this policy, the outcome could set a major precedent for how legal battles against the federal government unfold in the future. Whether the measure withstands judicial scrutiny remains to be seen, but it has already sparked concerns about the administration’s efforts to consolidate power and limit opposition through legal maneuvers.
For You:
- “Why Do They Always Skip?” Prince William and Kate Middleton will not be joining King Charles at the Easter gathering
- Real reason why Kelly Clarkson is unable to answer million-dollar question
- “We Can Outlast This Bully” Harvard Defies Trump as Laurence Tribe Predicts Legal Defeat in Explosive Showdown
- Prince Harry receives sad news after making unexpected decision
- “She’s Very Lonely” Jennifer Aniston Struggles to Find Love as Ex Moves On