Trump’s first 100 days marked by series of high-stakes court battles

President Donald Trump spent the first 100 days of the second White House in signing a wave of executive orders aimed at fulfilling his policy priorities: reducing government spending, communicating with illegal immigration and eliminating many diversity and equality initiatives that have been enacted under the Biden administration.

More than 150 executive requests that Trump signed away from his predecessors. But they also raised a flood of lawsuits that seek to prevent or stop his actions, which led to an increase in the confrontation to the extent that Trump could push to his second powers before the courts intervene or must intervene.

It is a constitutional clash waving on the horizon that revolves like the top through the federal courts; A group of listening and appeal sessions and emergency requests that deal with heavy issues represented in due legal procedures and protecting the first amendment included in the constitution.

Trump’s critics argue that a fast -paced strategy aims to confuse and overcome his opponents. His supporters contradict that he allows him to beat the maximum accuracy and avoid slow and slow Congress as the president follows his higher priorities.

The Trump administration requests the Supreme Court to review the case for the Al Salvador deportation

On his first 100 days, the administration’s lawyers went to the battalions in the courtrooms throughout the country to defend Trump’s early executive orders and stop a wave of lawsuits and orders for restrictions in emergency situations aimed at preventing them.

Meanwhile, Trump stressed that he “will never challenge” the Supreme Court as in the interview last week.

“I am a great believer in the Supreme Court and I have a lot of respect for the judges,” Trump told Time.

Critics say he really has.

“The second Trump administration has removed the handrails from the criteria that historically governs the rule of law and takes steps to strengthen the authority of the executive authority at the expense of two other branches of cases this year.

The Court of Appeal prevents Trump’s deportation trips, the supervisor of the immigration lawsuit for foreign enemies

President Donald Trump and Prosecutor Bam Bondi (Roberto Schmidt/AFP via Getty)

“These measures threaten the basic idea of ​​our democracy, especially since the administration seeks to eliminate the protection of legal procedures in seeking power.”

The biggest battles have been focused on the Trump administration’s use of the law of foreign enemies, a wartime law 1798, to deport some immigrants to El Salvador. Another major issue of watching is the challenges facing Trump’s executive order that ends the newly born citizenship.

Two separate federal judges, in the capital and Maryland, suggested that they could move to start a possible contempt for some Trump officials for refusing to comply with their orders.

In one case, a judge issued a major reprimand against Trump officials for their failure to return a resident of Maryland and claimed that he was wrongly deported to El Salvador this year. Separately, American provincial judge James Boomsberg said there is a possible reason to find Trump administration officials in criminal contempt to challenge his order to return deportations to El Salvador on March 15.

The Trump administration resisted, and responded to the lower court authority to stop its agenda. The Supreme Court approved hearing oral arguments on a challenge to some of the restraint orders in the country, starting with the case of citizenship in early May.

Meanwhile, White House officials have been inhabited against the “activist” judges who say they have crossed and behaved with a political agenda to prevent Trump’s policies. They exploded by the judges because they stopped the sexual transformation of the sexual ban in Trump, the return of the United States Agency for International Development and the State of Government Efficiency in Elon Musk (DOGE) from reaching the federal offices.

White House press secretary Caroline Levitt (AP Photo/Mark Schiesfelbein)

Some of the Congress allies threatened with evenings against the judges challenging Trump, but so far the Congress has not developed any isolation articles.

The White House press secretary Caroline Levitt rejected this week to exclude the arrest of federal judges, including the Supreme Court judges.

When asked in a journalist about the default on Monday, Levitte referred the matter to the Ministry of Justice, but he said that the judge in New Mexico had been arrested in a “clear obstruction case.”

And she said: “Thus, any person who breaks the law or hinders officials of federal law from performing their functions exposes themselves to the risk of prosecution.”

Jonathan Torley, a law professor and Fox News, Fox News Digitter, told Trump’s early actions to advance the 2026 preliminary elections and move with the utmost force to implement his agenda.

Click here to get the Fox News app

“Trump knows” he has no alternative but to move forward on all fronts if he will make meaningful progress in his promised reforms, “Torley told Fox News.

“The mid -range elections to the horizon are looming on the horizon in 2026. If Democrats regain the parliament, it knows that he can expect investigations, measurements and obstruction. This means that he must accelerate these cases and put his authority lines in areas ranging from migration to markets.”