{"id":2366708,"date":"2024-11-10T07:16:02","date_gmt":"2024-11-10T12:16:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/incoming-trump-doj-could-shake-up-pending-courtroom-disputes-washington-examiner\/"},"modified":"2024-11-10T07:19:26","modified_gmt":"2024-11-10T12:19:26","slug":"incoming-trump-doj-could-shake-up-pending-courtroom-disputes-washington-examiner","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/incoming-trump-doj-could-shake-up-pending-courtroom-disputes-washington-examiner\/","title":{"rendered":"Incoming Trump DOJ could shake up pending courtroom disputes &#8211; Washington Examiner"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">24<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Fincoming-trump-doj-could-shake-up-pending-courtroom-disputes-washington-examiner%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=2366708&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><p>The article discusses the potential \u200clegal ramifications following Donald Trump&#8217;s election victory and how it could influence\u2064 various ongoing court disputes tied\u200b to Biden administration policies. It highlights areas such as transgender procedures for minors, immigration,\u2062 environmental regulations, and gun control, where significant shifts may occur as the Trump administration re-evaluates legal strategies and positions.<\/p>\n<p>Notably, cases currently before the Supreme Court, including challenges \u2062to state\u2064 laws\u200b regarding transgender healthcare and a rule concerning gun parts by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms,\u2064 and Explosives (ATF), could see changes \u200cdepending on Trump&#8217;s approach. Legal experts \u200bsuggest that the\u2064 Trump \u2062administration\u200c may choose to pause or dismiss \u200dcases, \u200despecially those pertaining to\u200c agency regulations, as they weigh new rulemaking efforts.<\/p>\n<p>Additionally, the article touches on how\u2062 Trump&#8217;s return could dissolve current legal tensions between\u2062 Texas and the\u200c DOJ over <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/texas-installs-anti-climb-fence-in-brownsville-area-of-border-to-stop-illegal-immigration\/\" title=\"Texas erects anti-climb fence in Brownsville to halt illegal immigration\">border\u2062 security initiatives<\/a> that the Biden administration contested. It implies\u200b that\u200d Trump&#8217;s \u2062administration \u2063would likely\u2064 adopt a more favorable \u2064approach to Texas&#8217;s border measures, \u2062given his historical\u2062 support for strict immigration controls.<\/p>\n<p>the article \u2064posits that Trump&#8217;s administration could reshape the legal landscape significantly, reversing\u2062 several Biden-era\u2062 policies and potentially altering \u200cthe outcomes of various judicial challenges.  <\/p>\n<p class=\"readmore\">\n    <button onclick=\"showReadMore()\" id=\"readmorebtn\">Read more&#8230;<\/button>\n<\/p>\n<hr id=\"line\">\n<span id=\"more\"><\/p>\n<p><?xml encoding=\"utf-8\" ?><?xml encoding=\"utf-8\" ?><?xml encoding=\"utf-8\" ?><?xml encoding=\"utf-8\" ?><?xml encoding=\"utf-8\" ?><?xml encoding=\"utf-8\" ?><\/p>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\"><span class=\"tdb-mobile-menu-button\"><i class=\"tdb-mobile-menu-icon td-icon-mobile\"><\/i><\/span><\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\"><span class=\"tdb-header-search-button-mob dropdown-toggle\" data-toggle=\"dropdown\"><i class=\"tdb-mobile-search-icon td-icon-search\"><\/i><\/span><\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\"><\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\"><span class=\"tdb-mobile-menu-button\"><i class=\"tdb-mobile-menu-icon td-icon-mobile\"><\/i><\/span><\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\">\n<div class=\"tdb-drop-down-search\" aria-labelledby=\"td-header-search-button\">\n<div class=\"tdb-drop-down-search-inner\">\n<form method=\"get\" class=\"tdb-search-form\" action=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/\"><\/form>\n<div class=\"tdb-aj-search\"><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/#\" role=\"button\" aria-label=\"Search\" class=\"tdb-head-search-btn dropdown-toggle\" data-toggle=\"dropdown\"><i class=\"tdb-search-icon td-icon-search\"><\/i><\/a><\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\"><\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\">\n<h1 class=\"tdb-title-text\">Incoming Trump DOJ could shake up pending courtroom disputes<\/h1>\n<div><\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-title-line\"><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\"><\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\"><\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\">\n<div id=\"Brid_1877232\" class=\"tpd-featured-video bridtv\"><\/div>\n<p>President-elect <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/donald-trump\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">Donald Trump<\/a>&rsquo;s victory signals the potential for major shifts in court battles over <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/biden-administration\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">Biden administration<\/a> policies, covering areas such as <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/transgender\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">transgender<\/a> procedures for minors, immigration, environmental rules, and gun control.<\/p>\n<div class=\"article-paywall\">\n<p>The most visible impact may occur at the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/supreme-court\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">Supreme Court<\/a>, where the Biden administration is currently defending its stance on several high-stakes issues. Trump&rsquo;s administration could attempt to adjust positions in numerous cases currently pending in the federal court system, realigning legal strategies to fit his policy preferences or even seeking to dismiss certain cases.<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;\">Case Western Reserve University law professor Jonathan Entin told the Washington Examiner that completely tossing existing cases that have already spent months before the Supreme Court or a lower federal court can be challenging. Entin said that if a legal challenge targets an agency regulation, the DOJ might want to weigh its options regarding<\/span> handling existing lawsuits.<\/p>\n<p>That could involve the Trump administration alerting courts to its intention to change course on regulation in dispute through the rulemaking process rather than having the DOJ press forward on addressing the regulation in court.<\/p>\n<p>&ldquo;They might say, &lsquo;Well, the agency is now maybe rethinking its position.&rsquo; Maybe the agency might even begin its own rulemaking process to repeal or modify the rule that&rsquo;s at issue, and so the the Justice Department wouldn&rsquo;t necessarily have to say, &lsquo;we don&rsquo;t want to defend this case&rsquo; or &lsquo;it should be dismissed,&#8217;&rdquo; Entin said.<\/p>\n<p>As an alternative, Entin suggested it might be &ldquo;easier for the [Trump] Justice Department to say, &lsquo;Look, the agency is reopening this matter, reopening this rule.&rsquo; And so it might, as a matter of judicial economy, make sense to have this suit paused to give the agency an opportunity to decide what it wants to do.&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p>Trump has previously voiced strong opposition to many Biden-era policies, suggesting his administration would take a markedly different approach. Executive actions taken by Biden are especially vulnerable, as Trump could rescind them or replace them with new rules, affecting ongoing litigation over federal policies established through Biden&rsquo;s executive authority.<\/p>\n<p>A few cases not before the Supreme Court are already ripe for reexamination once Trump assumes office. For instance, in North Dakota, the Biden administration has been defending its &ldquo;waters of the U.S.&rdquo; rule from a multi-state legal challenge. Biden&rsquo;s rule replaced a Trump-era version after Biden took office, but a second Trump term could reverse course once more.<\/p>\n<p>In another North Dakota case, the Biden administration has been defending its policy that allows Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (<a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/daca\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">DACA<\/a>) participants to access healthcare under the Affordable Care Act (<a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/affordable-care-act\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">ACA<\/a>). Trump previously attempted to end both DACA and the ACA, so another Trump administration could revive those efforts.<\/p>\n<p>There is historical precedent for these reversals. For example, in 2021, Biden&rsquo;s administration defended the ACA after Trump&rsquo;s DOJ had argued against its constitutionality. In 2017, Trump&rsquo;s DOJ changed its position on an Obama-era case concerning Ohio&rsquo;s voter roll practices.<\/p>\n<p>&ldquo;Both parties have been doing this over the last 15 years, and there doesn&rsquo;t seem to be any reason to doubt that it&rsquo;s going to continue,&rdquo; Entin said.<\/p>\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Supreme Court cases that could shift after Trump&rsquo;s takeover<\/h2>\n<p>The Biden administration&rsquo;s challenge against Tennessee&rsquo;s <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/supreme-court-takes-up-mississippi-abortion-ban-case-that-could-limit-roe-v-wade\/\" title=\"Supreme Court Takes Up Mississippi Abortion Ban Case That Could Limit Roe v. Wade\">law restricting access<\/a> to transgender hormone procedures for minors could be a notable case Trump may choose to alter. As the Supreme Court prepares to hear arguments next month in the case <em><a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/policy\/healthcare\/3181841\/transgender-medicine-ban-minors-isnt-discriminatory-tennessee-supreme-court\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"Skrmetti v. United States\">Skrmetti v. United States<\/a><\/em>, the future Trump administration could inform the high court of its intent to withdraw from the case. But such a declaration might not come until weeks after the case has been argued since Trump will not be in office until Jan. 20.<\/p>\n<p>However, because families and civil rights groups are also plaintiffs, the Trump DOJ reversing course would not necessarily indicate that the justices would agree to dismiss the case, even if the DOJ switches its position to favor Tennessee&rsquo;s law.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant case, <em><a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/news\/supreme-court\/3181079\/supreme-court-looks-poised-uphold-atf-ghost-guns-rule\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"Garland v. Vanderstok\">Garland v. Vanderstok<\/a><\/em>, involves a rule from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) mandating that gun parts kits comply with the same rules as fully assembled firearms. <\/p>\n<p>After hearing arguments in October, the Supreme Court has not yet issued a decision, but a shift in DOJ policy under Trump could lead the administration to ask the Supreme Court to pause the case while it reevaluates the regulation. The justices seemed inclined during oral arguments to uphold the ATF&rsquo;s gun parts rules.<\/p>\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Border disputes between the DOJ and Texas likely to subside<\/h2>\n<p>Trump&rsquo;s return to power could also influence legal disputes between Texas and the DOJ concerning <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/house-republicans-accuse-biden-of-playing-political-game-over-border-crisis\/\" title=\"House Republicans Accuse Biden of Playing \u2018Political Game\u2019 Over Border Crisis\">border security measures<\/a>, notably the installation of floating barriers in the Rio Grande and the deployment of razor wire along the Texas-Mexico border.<\/p>\n<p>Under the Biden administration, the DOJ filed lawsuits against Texas, arguing that these <a href=\"https:\/\/amzn.to\/3YuVZYV\">border security measures violated federal law<\/a> and raised humanitarian concerns. For instance, in July 2023, the DOJ sued Texas over the deployment of <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/policy\/immigration\/3105649\/abbotts-buoy-barrier-texas-stay-afloat\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">floating barriers in the Rio Grande<\/a>, asserting that the state had not obtained the necessary federal authorization and that the barriers posed risks to navigation and public safety. An additional DOJ lawsuit surrounding Texas&rsquo;s border security efforts sought to preclude the Texas National Guard from erecting <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/news\/2810957\/supreme-court-allows-border-razor-wire-removal\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">razor wire<\/a> fences along the southern border.<\/p>\n<p>Now, there is a reasonable expectation that the federal government&rsquo;s stance on such border security measures will shift. <\/p>\n<p>Entin noted that the lawsuits in Texas &ldquo;are Justice Department cases, to begin with, and I think they can simply say, &lsquo;We no longer object to what Texas is doing. So we want to dismiss the case.&rsquo; I think they can do that.&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p>Trump has consistently advocated for <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/watch-migration-expert-describes-mass-deaths-on-joe-bidens-trail-of-tears\/\" title=\"Watch: Migration Expert Describes Mass Deaths on Joe Biden&#039;s Trail of Tears\">stringent border controls<\/a> and has supported state-led initiatives to curb illegal immigration. That suggests the DOJ, under Trump&rsquo;s leadership, may withdraw existing lawsuits against Texas regarding the floating barriers and razor wire, or at the very least, adopt a more supportive position toward these measures.<\/p>\n<p>Such a change would not only affect the legal proceedings but could embolden Texas and other states to implement similar border security strategies without fear of federal legal challenges.<\/p>\n<p><strong><a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>While the executive branch can influence the DOJ&rsquo;s litigation strategies, any changes to federal law or regulations governing navigable waters and border security would have a better chance of lasting judicial scrutiny if they came via legislative action or a formal rulemaking processes, which the Supreme Court underscored with its decision to <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/news\/supreme-court\/3045084\/supreme-court-shreds-chevron-doctrine-in-blow-to-agency-powers\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">overturn the 1984 <em>Chevron<\/em><\/a><em> <\/em>doctrine this summer.<\/p>\n<p>The overturning of <em>Chevron<\/em>, which informs courts that they no longer have to defer to an agency&rsquo;s &ldquo;reasonable&rdquo; interpretation of federal statutes when they are otherwise vague as it pertains to specific rules an agency wants to implement, means that presidential administrations would be better positioned to create a policy that rests soundly on the laws passed by Congress.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p> <script data-cfasync=\"false\" src=\"http:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/cdn-cgi\/scripts\/5c5dd728\/cloudflare-static\/email-decode.min.js\"><\/script><script>!function(){var g=window;g.googletag=g.googletag||{},g.googletag.cmd=g.googletag.cmd||[],g.googletag.cmd.push(function(){g.googletag.pubads().setTargeting(\"has-featured-video\",\"true\")})}();<\/script><script>var _bp=_bp||[];_bp.push({\"div\":\"Brid_1877232\",\"obj\":{\"id\":\"27789\",\"width\":\"1280\",\"height\":\"720\",\"stickyDirection\":\"below\",\"video\":\"1877232\"}});<\/script><script defer src=\"https:\/\/services.brid.tv\/player\/build\/brid.min.js\"><\/script><\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\"><\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\"><\/div>\n<p><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Incoming Trump DOJ may disrupt ongoing legal disputes<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2633,"featured_media":2366710,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/AP24116627929791.jpg.optimal.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[538],"tags":[44709,7076,3634],"class_list":["post-2366708","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-washington-examiner","tag-courtroom-disputes","tag-doj","tag-trump"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/AP24116627929791.jpg.optimal.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2366708","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2633"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2366708"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2366708\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2366712,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2366708\/revisions\/2366712"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2366710"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2366708"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2366708"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2366708"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}