The 17 Inspectors General Fired in January 2025
On January 24, 2025, the White House sent emails to at least 17 federal inspectors general telling them they were terminated immediately. The notices gave no 30-day warning to Congress and no written reasons beyond “changing priorities.” The inspectors general of the Department of Defense, State Department, Veterans Affairs, and Housing and Urban Development were among them. Federal law requires the president to notify Congress 30 days before removing an inspector general and to provide detailed, case-specific reasons. Trump did neither. In September 2025, federal Judge Ana C. Reyes ruled that the firings violated the Inspector General Act (Federal News Network) but declined to reinstate the watchdogs, reasoning the president could simply re-fire them after providing proper notice.
By October 2025, the administration fired another inspector general, this time with the 30-day notice to Congress.
”President Trump violated the IGA. That much is obvious.”
Judge Ana C. Reyes, ruling on the inspector general firings, September 2025Inspectors general are the internal watchdogs who audit federal spending and report to Congress. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities reported that few inspectors general published investigations into the administration’s own conduct in its first nine months, and it argued that the silence suggests some acting inspectors general may be avoiding or delaying sensitive investigations.
Justice Department Prosecutions of the President’s Critics
The Department of Justice is supposed to operate independently from the White House. That norm took hold after Watergate. The administration has opened investigations and brought charges against people who investigated or publicly criticized the president.
| Target | Role | What happened |
|---|---|---|
| James Comey | Former FBI Director who investigated Russian election interference | Indicted October 2025 over an Instagram post; first indictment dismissed due to unlawful appointment of prosecutor; re-indicted April 2026 |
| Letitia James | NY Attorney General who won civil fraud case against Trump Organization | Mortgage fraud investigation opened by DOJ; no public evidence of federal crime |
| Jerome Powell | Federal Reserve Chair who resisted White House pressure on interest rates | Criminal investigation opened January 2026; dropped April 2026 |
| Gen. John Kelly | Former White House Chief of Staff who publicly criticized Trump | Pentagon announced misconduct review November 2025; censure and retirement grade proceeding opened January 2026 |
| Southern Poverty Law Center | Civil rights organization that tracks hate groups | Indicted April 2026 on wire fraud and money laundering charges tied to paying confidential informants who infiltrate extremist groups |
Source: Brennan Center, Protect Democracy retaliatory action tracker.
Protect Democracy →The International Bar Association warned in early 2026 that the pattern amounts to “weaponisation” of the Justice Department. The Washington Post reported departures of career prosecutors after the push to prosecute former FBI Director James Comey. Protect Democracy maintains a tracker of what it counts as retaliatory arrests, prosecutions, and investigations.
Compliance With Federal Court Orders
The Constitution gives federal courts the power to check the executive branch through judicial review. When a court issues an order, the government must comply. Several 2025 cases tested how quickly it does.
The Abrego Garcia Case
- On March 12, 2025, ICE arrested Kilmar Abrego Garcia in Maryland. A 2019 immigration-court order, called withholding of removal, barred his deportation to El Salvador.
- On March 15, the government deported him to El Salvador, to a prison run by the Salvadoran government, and later called it an administrative error.
- On April 10, 2025, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the government must “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s return.
- The administration argued the ruling did not actually require them to bring him back.
- Federal Judge Xinis threatened contempt proceedings, accusing the DOJ of “willful and intentional noncompliance.”
- A Tennessee grand jury indicted him on human smuggling charges on May 21, 2025, and he was returned and arrested on June 6, nearly two months after the Supreme Court order (Maryland Matters).
- A federal judge dismissed those charges in May 2026 as a vindictive prosecution, and the government is appealing. The due process explainer follows the case since.
The 2025 Federal Funding Freeze
A week after the inauguration, the White House Office of Management and Budget issued a memo halting federal grant money to states for a range of programs. On February 10, U.S. District Judge John McConnell ordered immediate restoration of the funds, writing the freeze was “likely unconstitutional and has caused and continues to cause irreparable harm to a vast portion of this country.” Officials were found to have violated the plain language of the order.
The House Bid to Limit Contempt Power
The House version of the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” included Section 70302, which would have stripped federal courts of the power to enforce contempt citations against the government for violating injunctions unless the plaintiff had posted a bond. The Senate parliamentarian ruled the provision violated the Byrd rule and it was stripped from the Senate version.
Federal Funding Withheld From States
Several states that resisted administration policies on immigration or elections have had federal funding frozen or denied, and courts have blocked some of those actions. In early January 2026, the administration froze billions of dollars in child care and other essential services to five states with Democratic governors. A district court blocked the freeze. In Colorado, after the state refused to release Tina Peters from prison (a former county clerk convicted of breaching election equipment) the president said he would punish the state. What followed:
- Federal disaster funding denied for wildfires and flooding in rural Colorado
- Federal project funding withheld from communities across the state
- A federal judge found the administration had threatened Colorado funding as “punishment” over Peters The fires and floods hit Rio Blanco, La Plata, Archuleta, and Mineral counties. All but one of those counties voted for Trump in 2024. The administration also demanded detailed information on nearly all federal funding going to 14 states and Washington, D.C., every one of which voted against the president. The Harvard Law Review analyzed these actions as politically discriminatory funding cuts that may violate the First Amendment and the Spending Clause.
National Emergency Declarations Since 2025
The National Emergencies Act of 1976 lets a president declare a national emergency and use powers Congress has set aside for one. Since January 2025, the president has declared at least 10 national emergencies, which the Brennan Center counts as more than any modern president in a comparable period. They include:
| Emergency declared | What it enabled |
|---|---|
| National Energy Emergency (January 2025) | Bypassed environmental review for drilling permits; extended for another year in January 2026 |
| Immigration "invasion" (January 2025) | Deployed military for domestic immigration enforcement |
| Foreign drug cartels (2025) | Froze assets and imposed sanctions outside normal legal channels |
| Trade emergency (2025) | Invoked IEEPA to impose sweeping tariffs without congressional approval |
No recent president has invoked emergency powers this frequently or across this broad a range of issues. Source: Brennan Center.
Brennan Center →The Brennan Center has documented that no recent president has invoked emergency powers this frequently, across this broad a range of issues, or as a routine tool for advancing domestic policy goals. Congress can end a declaration by passing a resolution, but the president can veto it, so ending one over his objection takes a two-thirds vote in both chambers.
On February 20, 2026, in Learning Resources v. Trump, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not authorize the president to impose tariffs, and importers are seeking refunds of the tariffs collected under it. Our tariffs explainer covers what the ruling did and did not change.
The Iran Strikes and the War Powers Resolution
On February 28, 2026, the United States began military strikes against Iran. The administration notified Congress on March 2, starting the 60-day clock under the War Powers Resolution. That clock ran out on May 1. Rather than seeking congressional authorization, the president told Congress the clock had stopped because he ordered a ceasefire on April 7, 2026. Members of Congress from both parties disagreed, noting that both sides continued enforcing naval blockades through military force and that a ceasefire does not stop the War Powers clock. The president told reporters he considers seeking congressional authorization “unconstitutional”. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war. Congress has not passed a law authorizing military action against Iran. It has voted on war powers resolutions instead: on May 19, 2026, the Senate voted 50-47 to discharge one, S.J.Res. 185, from committee (Senate roll call), and on June 23 the Senate adopted H.Con.Res. 86, which the House had passed June 3. The War Powers Act explainer lists every vote. Read the full Iran timeline on our Foreign Policy hub.
Senate Vote to Discharge S.J.Res. 185, May 19, 2026
A motion to bring an Iran war powers resolution out of committee. It needed a simple majority and passed.
What Comes Next for Executive Power
Each check above runs through a different institution: inspectors general, prosecutors, the courts, federal funding and Congress. Two outcomes are possible for each.
If the Guardrails Hold
Courts continue issuing orders and the government complies, restoring the precedent that no one is above the law. Congress restores inspector general positions and funds independent oversight. The War Powers Resolution is enforced, and future presidents cannot start wars alone.
If Compliance Becomes Optional
Court orders become suggestions the executive branch follows when convenient. No internal watchdogs remain to catch fraud, waste, or abuse of power. Emergency declarations replace legislation as the primary governing tool, and Congress becomes ceremonial.
What You Can Do About Executive Power
- Learn the specific cases. The details matter. When you call or write your representatives, cite the specific court order, firing or case. Bookmark Protect Democracy’s tracker and the Brennan Center’s emergency powers tracker.
- Know who your inspector general is. Every major federal agency has one. If yours has been fired or replaced, your state’s congressional delegation should hear about it.
- Check whether your state is being targeted. The CBPP tracker and States United track funding freezes and politically motivated funding actions.
Last updated October 3, 2026