The second Trump administration faced a major blow in court on Friday, as three different legal rulings were made against key policies and executive actions.
These defeats came within hours of each other, highlighting how courts are becoming a strong obstacle to Trump’s efforts, even with Republicans holding a slim majority in Congress. Here’s a breakdown of the three rulings and what they mean for the future of the administration’s policies.
1. U.S. Institute of Peace Must Return to Original Board
In Washington, D.C., Federal Judge Beryl A. Howell ruled against the Trump administration’s attempt to take over the U.S. Institute of Peace.
The issue started in March 2025, when the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)—now led by Elon Musk—removed the Institute’s board. However, in May, Howell decided this move was illegal, saying the Institute was not part of the executive branch. This means the President had no right to fire its board.
On Friday, the government tried to reverse that ruling, but Howell refused. She said the administration had no strong legal reason to support its case.
2. Executive Order Against Jenner & Block Ruled Unconstitutional
In another ruling, District Judge John Bates blocked an executive order signed by Trump that targeted the law firm Jenner & Block. The firm had been involved in cases against Trump or his political allies.
Trump’s order removed security clearances from the firm’s employees and banned them from entering federal buildings. But Judge Bates, a George W. Bush appointee, said this action was likely unconstitutional.
He explained that the executive order tried to punish legal work that the administration didn’t like, which goes against the basic idea of separation of powers. He said the order was an attempt to stop legal checks on the government and blocked it completely.
3. Massachusetts Judge Orders Articles Restored in Health Website
In Massachusetts, Judge Leo T. Sorokin ruled in favour of plaintiffs who challenged Trump’s executive order targeting so-called “gender ideology.”
In January, articles about gender identity and patient safety were removed from a government health resource website, following Trump’s new policy. But Judge Sorokin said the removal of these articles was a clear case of viewpoint discrimination, which violates the First Amendment.
He ordered the articles to be restored on the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) website, calling the removal unconstitutional.
Why These Rulings Matter
These rulings show how the judicial system continues to act as a check on executive power, especially under controversial policies. Since Trump returned to the White House in January 2025, courts have already blocked:
- Deportation of migrants to third countries
- Cuts to foreign aid
- Bans on transgender people in the military
Now, with these three additional rulings, the administration may face even more legal pushback in the coming months.