Trump Trial Pro forma

James George

Government 

23 November 2025

Trump Trial Pro forma 

Follow the rule of law 

I lie awake at night, thinking about what is to come, and reconciling myself to the end of the Trump regime. How will it go?

President Trump, you are charged with failing to uphold your oath of office and your allegiance to the US Constitution. How do you plead?

[The plaintiff's attorneys advise a plea of not guilty, and he grumbles and swears to himself.]

Laws and regulations, as well as our Constitution, are written in a manner that the average citizen can understand. I am turning my allegations over to Constitutional lawyers to prosecute the case.

Here is a list of indictable charges accompanied by references to specific evidence:

List of Directives from Trump that are illegal

Numerous directives from the Trump administration have been challenged in court, with many being temporarily or permanently blocked by federal judges as unlawful or unconstitutional. These rulings often center on issues of executive authority, statutory interpretation, and constitutional rights. 

Key examples of directives found by courts to be illegal or unconstitutional include:

• Blocking Federal Funding for "Sanctuary" Cities: Federal courts consistently blocked the administration's efforts to withhold federal funds from "sanctuary" cities and counties that limited cooperation with federal immigration enforcement efforts, ruling the action unconstitutional.
• Ending Birthright Citizenship via Executive Order: Multiple federal judges have blocked the administration from enforcing an executive order that sought to end automatic birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. to undocumented immigrants, citing that the 14th Amendment and over a century of Supreme Court precedent guarantee birthright citizenship and that such a change would require a constitutional amendment.
• Freeze on Federal Grants and Loans: Courts issued preliminary injunctions against a broad, sweeping freeze on federal grants and loans for various programs (including for medical research and education), finding the policy unconstitutional and potentially catastrophic for affected organizations.
• Ban on Transgender People Serving in the Military and Other Transgender-Related Directives: Federal judges blocked directives that aimed to ban transgender individuals from serving in the military or ended federal funding for medical providers who offered gender-affirming care, finding they violated equal protection rights.
• Targeting of Specific Law Firms: A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order against executive orders that targeted specific law firms (like Perkins Coie, Paul, Weiss, and WilmerHale) with sanctions and removal of security clearances, noting the action "casts a chilling harm of blizzard proportion across the entire legal profession".
• Efforts to Dismantle Federal Agencies: A U.S. District Court judge permanently blocked an executive order aimed at dismantling the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS), a federal agency, finding the action unlawful.
• Tariffs Imposed Under Emergency Powers: A U.S. Court of Appeals found the President had exceeded his authority when imposing certain tariffs using a national emergency statute, ruling the action "invalid as contrary to law" because tariffs are a core Congressional power.
• Anti-Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Executive Orders: Federal courts issued preliminary injunctions against executive orders that sought to terminate equity-related grants and contracts and required certifications that grantees did not operate programs promoting DEI, ruling they likely violated the First and Fifth Amendments. 

List of actions defying court orders

During his presidency and in his post-presidency actions (which are also facing legal challenges), Donald Trump has been accused of, and in some cases found by judges to have, defied or ignored court orders and legal rulings. 

Key instances include:

• Deportation using the Alien Enemies Act: In April 2025 (post-presidency), the Trump administration was accused of removing over 100 alleged gang members to El Salvador under the Alien Enemies Act despite a federal judge ordering that they be returned to the U.S..
• Foreign Aid Freeze: A federal judge ruled that the Trump administration violated a court order to temporarily unfreeze foreign aid. The judge declined to hold officials in civil contempt but confirmed the administration had transgressed the order.
• Targeting Law Firms with Executive Orders: In March 2025 (post-presidency), Donald Trump issued executive orders aimed at penalizing specific law firms (Perkins Coie, Paul, Weiss, WilmerHale) for various reasons, including their diversity initiatives or association with investigators like Robert Mueller. One firm, Perkins Coie, secured a temporary restraining order blocking most provisions of the executive order, but the initial order itself represented an attempt to use executive power in a way that prompted immediate legal challenge and judicial intervention.
• Immigration Policies: Various lawsuits challenged the Trump administration's immigration policies, with judges issuing injunctions and rulings against actions such as withholding federal funds from "sanctuary cities" and altering asylum rules. The administration was often accused of continuing practices or implementing policies that had been at least partially blocked by court orders.
• Border Wall Funding: Legal battles over the use of military funds for border wall construction after declaring a national emergency involved court orders that were challenged by the administration.
• Birthright Citizenship: Federal judges issued preliminary injunctions to block a Trump executive order restricting birthright citizenship. 

In some cases, critics argued that the administration's pattern involved ignoring initial court rulings or continuing actions until higher courts intervened, leading to accusations of a general disregard for judicial authority. 

List of actions undermining legal precedent and norms

Legal experts and scholars have identified numerous actions by Donald Trump that they describe as challenging established legal precedents and democratic norms, primarily centered on an expansive view of executive power and a disregard for the rule of law. 

Key examples of these actions include:

• Politicizing the Department of Justice (DOJ): This includes pressuring the DOJ to investigate political rivals and overturn the 2020 election results, departing from the post-Watergate norm of an independent DOJ.
• Challenging election results and democratic processes: This encompasses efforts to pressure election officials to change vote counts, contesting the legitimacy of the 2020 election, and his involvement surrounding the January 6, 2021, Capitol insurrection.
• Attacks on the judiciary and the legal profession: Trump has frequently criticized judges who issued rulings against him, calling them "radical left lunatics" and "deranged". His administration also issued executive orders that targeted specific law firms (e.g., Perkins Coie, Paul Weiss) due to their associations with individuals involved in investigations against him or their pro bono work, an action a judge noted "casts a chilling harm of blizzard proportion across the entire legal profession".
• Defiance of court orders and congressional oversight: The Trump administration, in several instances, was accused of failing to comply with court rulings and defying subpoenas from Congress, creating conflict with the principle of the separation of powers.
• Abuse of appointment power: Legal experts noted a norm-breaking reliance on "acting" officials who had not been confirmed by the Senate to lead federal agencies, circumventing the constitutional appointments process.
• Misuse of presidential pardons: The granting of pardons to political allies and individuals involved in the January 6 insurrection has been described as a use of presidential power to reward loyalty and undermine investigations into wrongdoing.
• Efforts to circumvent Congress's power of the purse: The administration attempted to impound (freeze) congressionally approved funds for programs it opposed, which was met with legal challenges and temporarily blocked by courts.
• Undermining the independent civil service: Actions included attempts to replace non-partisan, expert civil servants with political loyalists and summarily firing inspectors general (watchdog officials) without providing the statutorily required detailed rationale to Congress.
• Targeting of civil society and the media: The administration launched government attacks on perceived enemies, including non-profit organizations, news organizations, and activists, which critics argue was an attempt to suppress dissent and free speech.
• Challenging constitutional principles like birthright citizenship: Trump issued an executive order declaring he would end the long-standing understanding that the 14th Amendment grants citizenship to babies born on U.S. soil to undocumented parents, an order subsequently blocked by a federal judge as "blatantly unconstitutional". 

These actions, among others, have led legal scholars to raise concerns about the erosion of the rule of law and a move towards an "imperial presidency". 

List of actions undermining the role of Congress

Donald Trump's actions have been widely documented and litigated as attempts to expand executive power and undermine the constitutional role of Congress in areas such as the power of the purse, oversight, and legislative authority. 

Key actions include:

Undermining the Power of the Purse 

• Withholding Congressionally Approved Funds: The Trump administration repeatedly attempted to freeze or block billions of dollars in funds that Congress had already appropriated, most notably nearly $5 billion in foreign aid. This led to legal challenges, with federal courts ruling that the President cannot unilaterally withhold appropriated funds.
• Attempted "Pocket Rescission": The administration attempted to use a rare maneuver called a "pocket rescission" to permanently cancel approved funding without congressional action by proposing cuts near the end of the fiscal year. A federal judge declared this tactic illegal, affirming that only Congress can cancel approved funds.
• Reprogramming Funds for the Border Wall: Trump declared a national emergency at the U.S.-Mexico border to bypass Congress and redirect billions of dollars from the defense budget to fund the construction of a border wall, an objective that Congress had not fully funded through the normal legislative process. 

Resisting Congressional Oversight

• Stonewalling Subpoenas and Investigations: The Trump administration adopted a policy of broad noncompliance with congressional oversight requests, refusing to provide documents and witnesses in over 100 investigations. The White House directed current and former officials not to testify or provide information, leading to numerous legal battles over the limits of executive privilege.
• Blocking Access to Information: The administration blocked high-ranking officials and private entities with government contracts from providing information to congressional committees, often citing broad claims of executive privilege or using non-disclosure agreements.
• Ignoring Statutory Reporting Requirements: The administration, in some cases, ignored or defied laws requiring it to report specific information to Congress, such as an unclassified report on the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. 

Bypassing Legislative Authority

• Issuing Executive Orders on Major Policy: Trump issued a high volume of executive orders to implement significant policy changes that could not pass through Congress, such as aspects of COVID-19 relief, attempts to end birthright citizenship, and regulatory rollbacks.
• Using Emergency Powers for Tariffs: The administration used emergency powers, typically reserved for national security crises, to impose global tariffs without specific congressional authorization, a move that faced legal challenges.
• Politicizing Independent Agencies: Actions were taken to assert greater White House control over independent agencies, such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Department of Justice, which are intended to operate with a degree of independence from the executive branch. 

Image: CNN