Department of Justice attorneys, including seasoned lawyers and recent hires, are grappling with defending a barrage of Trump executive orders. The orders, challenged immediately in court, have sparked judicial frustration, with some lawyers admitting insufficient preparation and errors, raising questions about the administration’s legal strategy and credibility nationally.
Both veteran and newly hired attorneys from the Department of Justice are having a tough time defending President Trump’s executive orders in front of “frustrated” and skeptical judges. The measures were swiftly challenged in court.
The current administration’s legal team is reportedly making the case for the drastic changes the incoming president is seeking without adequately preparing for the case or, worse, by going into courtrooms without a valid argument because their stance is unfounded or not supported by enough evidence, as reported in the Wall Street Journal.
One Trump administration attorney admitted before a judge last week, “Your honor, I don’t have the answer to that precise question off the top of my head,” as the Journal reports that “uncomfortable” interactions have become standard practice in defending Trump’s moves. To which the judge responded, “OK, but that strikes me as a pretty important question.”
Judges around the nation have expressed their displeasure and reprimanded the Department of Justice (DOJ) attorneys when they have faltered on matters of law and fact concerning the actions of President Trump and his associates, as reported by Josh Dawsey, C. Ryan Barber, and Jacob Gershman of the Journal. Corrections to what attorneys had previously told the courts were later submitted in a few instances.
In one instance, an attorney from the Department of Justice informed a judge that 500 employees at USAID had been placed on leave, and that the foreign-aid expenditure freeze that was ordered by Trump only affected future contractors. There was a complete halt to all contract negotiations, and over 2,100 workers were put on administrative leave.
Such blunders have been reducing the likelihood that the Trump administration would soon receive a favorable verdict.
The paper states that the legal challenges arise from the need to defend multiple executive orders simultaneously, which has made it challenging to establish a solid case to present in court, The Raw Story shares.
According to sources close to the situation, DOJ lawyers have been upset by recent judicial reprimands and have privately complained that agencies have given them false information and asked them to defend executive orders that they would not have drafted.
The Journal reports that this has happened within the civil division, where lawyers have become increasingly frustrated with being put in difficult litigation positions and have even expressed discomfort about defending Trump’s order to limit birthright citizenship.
Luis Gochoco is a seasoned managing editor and writer with over a decade of experience covering politics, technology, gaming, and entertainment news. With a keen eye for breaking stories and in-depth analysis, he has established himself as a trusted voice in digital journalism. Luis is one of the key forces behind the success of GameNGuide, contributing to 12 million views through engaging and high-traffic content. He also played a pivotal role in generating 8 million views on International Business Times, shaping the platform’s technology and gaming coverage.
Discover more from Today's Esquire
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
