The Justice Department has been actively responding to over a hundred emergency lawsuits during the first hundred days of President Donald Trump’s administration, consistently adopting a strategy to defend his policies. This approach involves vigorously supporting Trump’s directives and, when faced with challenges, attempting to obfuscate the legal proceedings. The department has been known to expedite cases to higher courts, selectively interpret court orders, and assert the president’s authority over judicial decisions based on his electoral mandate.

However, this aggressive defense has faced criticism for its questionable legal interpretations and lack of adherence to established legal norms. Judges have expressed concerns about the administration’s disregard for due process and the rule of law, particularly in immigration cases and deportation processes. Former officials have pointed out instances where the administration’s actions may have overstepped legal boundaries and undermined the principles of justice.

Furthermore, the Justice Department’s defense tactics have been scrutinized for their lack of preparedness and inability to provide clear answers in court. This has led to challenges in cases involving data privacy, immigrant deportations, and controversial policies. Amidst these legal battles, questions have been raised about the administration’s commitment to upholding the rule of law and the potential consequences of its confrontational approach towards the judiciary.