A public resource tracking the legal challenges to the Trump administration's executive orders and actions.
Litigation Tracker
Find legal challenges to executive orders and actions from the Trump administration.
Trump Action Tracker | Keeping a tally of Trump's actions
Free and independent tracker documenting Trump-related actions using verified news sources. Statements & plans mapped to authoritarianism domains.
Trump Action Tracker | Keeping a tally of Trump's actions
Free and independent tracker documenting Trump-related actions using verified news sources. Statements & plans mapped to authoritarianism domains.
Tracking regulatory changes in the second Trump administration | Brookings
How much regulation is happening under the Trump administration? This tracker helps you monitor a selection of delayed, repealed, and new rules, notable guidance and policy implementations, and important court battles covering energy, health, labor, and more.
Collection: Just Security’s Coverage of Trump Administration Executive Actions
Ongoing coverage, including in concise “What Just Happened” expert explainers, legal and policy analysis, and other resources.
Lawsuit seeks to uncover information about alleged federal database on protesters
The Intercept and Democracy Forward are trying to pry loose details about a database the Trump administration is allegedly maintaining.
Supreme Connections: Search Supreme Court Disclosures — ProPublica
Search Supreme Court financial disclosures for organizations and people that have paid justices, reimbursed them for travel, given them gifts and more.
Major television networks pull out of presidential press pool following lawsuit filed against Trump by CNN, MS NOW, and ‘Politico’
The three media outlets are taking the administration to court in defense of the First Amendment. The president barred them from the White House as punishment for their coverage
Trump’s DHS is using an obscure law to secretly snoop on journalists, non-profits and unions: ‘It’s outrageous’
Even after judges rejected the same ploy, the Trump administration is going directly to social media and telecommunications companies
Exhibit Public Redacted Memorandum of Law – #1587, Att. #1 in The New York Times Company v. Microsoft Corporation (S.D.N.Y., 1:23-cv-11195) – CourtListener.com
LETTER addressed to Judge Sidney H. Stein from Davida Brook dated September 17, 2026 re: Public, Redacted Version of News' Plaintiffs' Memorandum of Law. Document filed by Daily News LP, The Center for Investigative Reporting, Inc., The Intercept Media, Inc., The New York Times Company, Ziff Davis, LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Public Redacted Memorandum of Law)Filed In Associated Cases: 1:25-md-03143-SHS-OTW et al..(Brook, Davida) (Entered: 09/17/2026)
Law.com | The Premier Source for Global Legal News & Analysis
Law.com delivers news, insights and resources that allow legal professionals to anticipate opportunities, adapt to change, and prepare for future success.
Hallucination-Free? Assessing the Reliability of Leading AI Legal Research Tools
Legal practice has witnessed a sharp rise in products incorporating artificial intelligence (AI). Such tools are designed to assist with a wide range of core legal tasks, from search and summarization of caselaw to document drafting. But the large language models used in these tools are prone to "hallucinate," or make up false information, making their use risky in high-stakes domains. Recently, certain legal research providers have touted methods such as retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) as "eliminating" (Casetext, 2023) or "avoid[ing]" hallucinations (Thomson Reuters, 2023), or guaranteeing "hallucination-free" legal citations (LexisNexis, 2023). Because of the closed nature of these systems, systematically assessing these claims is challenging. In this article, we design and report on the first preregistered empirical evaluation of AI-driven legal research tools. We demonstrate that the providers' claims are overstated. While hallucinations are reduced relative to general-purpose chatbots (GPT-4), we find that the AI research tools made by LexisNexis (Lexis+ AI) and Thomson Reuters (Westlaw AI-Assisted Research and Ask Practical Law AI) each hallucinate between 17% and 33% of the time. We also document substantial differences between systems in responsiveness and accuracy. Our article makes four key contributions. It is the first to assess and report the performance of RAG-based proprietary legal AI tools. Second, it introduces a comprehensive, preregistered dataset for identifying and understanding vulnerabilities in these systems. Third, it proposes a clear typology for differentiating between hallucinations and accurate legal responses. Last, it provides evidence to inform the responsibilities of legal professionals in supervising and verifying AI outputs, which remains a central open question for the responsible integration of AI into law.
Supreme Court Halts Federal Limits on Social Media Algorithm Regulation
U.S. Supreme Court Blocks Online Transparency and Fairness Act On October 1, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a critical emergency injunction that effectively halted the enforcement of the Online…
Explore Financial Disclosures From President Trump and 1,500 of His Appointees - ProPublica
Use this database to explore potential conflicts of interest for President Donald Trump and his team. The documents disclose positions officials have held outside government, their assets and their debts, among other things.
Why I’m Suing the US Government « bunnie's blog
Today I filed a lawsuit against the US government, challenging Section 1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Section 1201 means that you can be sued or prosecuted for accessing, speaking about, and tinkering with digital media and technologies that you have paid for. This violates our First Amendment rights, and I am asking the court to order the federal government to stop enforcing Section 1201.
Supreme Court gives Trump an interim win on his mail voting order, but hurdles loom
The Supreme Court paused a lower court's ruling that blocked key parts of Trump's order to limit voting by mail for the midterms. But U.S. Postal Service work on the order remains blocked nationwide.
