U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

Catherine Herridge, a US journalist, faces a $800-per-day fine unless she reveals sources for 2017 Fox News stories. A district court held her in civil contempt, and an appeals court recently denied her request to stay the contempt ruling.

A federal appeals court rejected the Trump administration's attempt to abandon a Biden-era EPA rule imposing stricter standards for soot pollution. The ruling upholds a 2024 standard limiting fine particle pollution to 9 micrograms per cubic meter of air, down from 12 micrograms, and criticizes the EPA's arguments as lacking merit. Environmental groups praised the decision as a public health victory, while opponents argued it would increase costs for businesses and families.

A federal appeals court rejected the Trump administration's attempt to abandon a Biden-era rule that tightens soot pollution standards. The court found the EPA's arguments lacked merit, upholding a 9 microgram per cubic meter annual limit on fine particle pollution. The decision supports public health benefits projected by the Biden-era rule, which aims to reduce asthma cases and premature deaths.

A federal appeals court rejected the Trump administration's attempt to invalidate a Biden-era EPA rule that tightens soot pollution standards. The court upheld the 2024 rule, which reduces annual fine particle pollution limits from 12 to 9 micrograms per cubic meter of air, despite the EPA's argument that it exceeded statutory authority and ignored economic costs. Environmental groups praised the decision as a public health victory.

A federal appeals court rejected the Trump administration's attempt to abandon a Biden-era rule imposing stricter standards on soot pollution. The decision upheld a 2024 rule requiring a tighter annual limit of 9 micrograms of fine particle pollution per cubic meter of air, rejecting the EPA's claim that it exceeded statutory authority. The ruling supports public health benefits projected to prevent thousands of premature deaths and hospital visits.

A federal appeals court allowed the Trump administration to resume expanded use of expedited deportations nationwide, overturning a lower court's temporary block. The 2-1 ruling included two Trump-appointed judges who dismissed due process concerns, while a third Obama-appointed judge had previously raised risks of wrongful deportations under the policy.

A federal appeals court allowed the Trump administration to resume expanded use of expedited deportations nationwide, overturning a lower court ruling that had temporarily blocked the policy. The decision, split along partisan lines, upheld the administration's expansion of expedited removal to all undocumented migrants, despite concerns about due process raised by plaintiffs.

A federal appeals court allowed the Trump administration to resume expanded use of expedited deportations nationwide. The three-judge panel, including two Trump-appointed judges and one Obama-appointed judge, overturned a lower court's block on the policy. The administration argued the expansion is legal and necessary for immigration control, while critics claimed it violates due process.

A federal appeals court allowed the Trump administration to resume expanded use of expedited removal for undocumented migrants nationwide, overturning a lower court's block. The 3-judge panel, with two Trump appointees and one Obama appointee, ruled the plaintiffs did not prove the process denied due process. The ACLU criticized the decision as undermining fair deportation procedures.

A federal appeals court allowed the Trump administration to resume expanded use of expedited deportations nationwide, overturning a lower court ruling that had blocked the policy. The decision, split along judicial appointment lines, permits the removal of undocumented migrants beyond border areas, with the administration calling it a key immigration enforcement tool and critics arguing it violates due process.

A federal appeals court allowed the Trump administration to expand a fast-track deportation process, enabling the expedited removal of non-citizens living far from the border. The ruling overturned a previous decision blocking the Department of Homeland Security's expansion of this process.

The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C., is covered by a tarp and scaffolding after President Donald Trump’s name was removed following a court order. The removal followed a federal appeals court upholding a judge’s ruling that blocked Trump’s attempt to rename the center and halt its operations. The center’s spokesperson stated the tarp will remain during facade maintenance.

The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C., has a tarp covering its facade after President Donald Trump’s name was removed following a court order. The removal occurred after a federal appeals court upheld a deadline to take down Trump’s name, which he had added during his efforts to control the center’s governance and programming. A spokesperson stated the tarp and scaffolding will remain for maintenance work on the building’s exterior.

The facade of the John F. Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C., is covered by a tarp after President Donald Trump's name was removed following a court order. The tarp remains in place during maintenance work, as legal challenges and court decisions continue regarding Trump's involvement with the center's governance and name.

The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C., is covered by a tarp days after President Donald Trump’s name was removed following a court order. The removal occurred after a federal appeals court upheld a deadline to take down Trump’s name, which he had added during his second term, and a judge ruled against his efforts to rename the center and close it for renovations.

President Trump’s name was removed from the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts following a court order, with a tarp and scaffolding now covering the building’s facade during maintenance. The removal followed legal challenges and Trump’s efforts to restructure the center, including appointing a new board and planning renovations, which were halted by a court ruling.

A weatherproof tarp covers the facade of the John F. Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C., after President Donald Trump’s name was removed following a court order. The tarp and scaffolding remain as crews perform maintenance, while legal disputes over Trump’s efforts to rename and control the center continue.

The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C., has a weatherproof tarp covering its facade after President Donald Trump’s name was removed following a court order. A federal appeals court upheld a deadline for the removal, and the center cited maintenance work as the reason for the tarp. Rep. Joyce Beatty’s lawsuit challenged Trump’s efforts to rename the center and block its closure, which a judge later ordered to stop.

The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C., has its facade covered by a tarp after President Donald Trump’s name was removed following a court order. The tarp remains in place during maintenance work on the building’s exterior, while legal challenges and renovations related to Trump’s efforts to rebrand the center continue.

A tarp covers the facade of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C., after President Donald Trump’s name was removed following a court ruling. The scaffolding and tarp remain in place during maintenance work, while legal challenges to Trump’s involvement with the center’s governance continue.

The Kennedy Center board requested a federal appeals court to temporarily block a judge’s order requiring the removal of President Donald Trump’s name from the institution’s signage and materials. A judge previously ruled Congress, not the board, controls the Kennedy Center’s name, denying the board’s request to pause enforcement of the order.

The Kennedy Center board requested a federal appeals court to temporarily block a judge's order requiring removal of President Donald Trump's name from the institution's signage and materials. The board argued that removing Trump's name could incur costs and public confusion, while the judge previously ruled Congress, not the board, controls the Kennedy Center's name.

U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper faces a judicial misconduct complaint from the conservative watchdog group CASA, which alleges he failed to recuse himself from a lawsuit involving President Donald Trump's attempt to rename the Kennedy Center. The complaint cites Cooper's wife, Amy Jeffress, who has a history of representing clients opposing Trump, including Lisa Page and Joe Biden, as a conflict of interest.

The Trump administration argues that construction of a $400 million White House ballroom cannot be stopped, while the National Trust for Historic Preservation challenges the project's legal basis. The Supreme Court may soon rule on the case, alongside other pending decisions including restrictions on media access to executions and limits on early prison release under the First Step Act.

Government lawyers argued a court cannot halt construction of a White House ballroom due to ongoing work and national security concerns, stating only Congress could stop the $400 million project. A judge previously ordered a pause on aboveground construction, but underground work on a bunker and security facilities was allowed to continue.

Government attorneys argue that courts cannot halt construction of a Trump-era White House ballroom due to ongoing work and national security concerns. A federal judge previously ordered a pause on aboveground construction, but the government claims only Congress can block the $400 million project. The National Trust for Historic Preservation sued to stop the project after demolition of the White House East Wing began.

A federal appeals court panel ruled that the Trump administration's Pentagon policy banning transgender troops from military service was illegal, finding it designed to exclude people based on gender identity. The ban remains in effect as the court decision is on hold for potential further review, blocking new transgender recruits but sparing current service members named in the lawsuit.

Alabama has requested the Supreme Court to allow use of a congressional map deemed racially discriminatory by a lower court. The plaintiffs opposing the map submitted responses, followed by Alabama's reply, with the justices potentially acting soon. The court also denied a stay of execution for Andrew Lukehart, scheduled for execution in Florida.

A federal appeals court ruled that a Trump administration policy banning transgender troops from military service was illegal, upholding a prior district court decision. The ruling found the policy likely violated constitutional rights, while other developments included U.S.-Iran military tensions and plans to reduce African visa-processing embassies.

A federal appeals court ruled that a Pentagon policy banning transgender troops from military service was illegal. The decision, from a three-judge panel in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, marked another legal challenge to President Donald Trump's policies.

A federal appeals court ruled that a Trump administration policy banning transgender troops from military service is illegal, upholding a prior injunction but narrowing its scope to active-duty plaintiffs. The majority opinion criticized the policy as targeting transgender individuals, while dissenting judges argued the military's decisions should be respected.

Rising energy prices from the Iran war are increasing bond market interest rates, exacerbating economic challenges for Trump ahead of midterms. A court ruled against a Trump administration policy banning transgender troops, and former Colorado elections clerk Tina Peters was released after her sentence was commuted by the governor following Trump's pressure.

A federal appeals court ruled that a Trump administration policy banning transgender troops from military service is illegal, upholding a prior court decision. The court narrowed a preliminary injunction to apply only to current transgender service members, not those seeking to join. The policy was criticized as targeting transgender individuals based on political bias.

A federal appeals court panel ruled that a Trump administration policy banning transgender troops from military service is illegal, upholding a prior district court decision. The court found the policy, based on an executive order claiming transgender identity harms military readiness, was driven by a desire to harm a politically unpopular group. The injunction was narrowed to current service members but not those seeking to join.

A federal appeals court panel ruled that the Trump administration's policy banning transgender troops from military service was illegal, upholding a prior injunction against the policy. The court narrowed the injunction to apply only to current transgender service members, not those seeking to join. The policy, based on an executive order claiming transgender identity harms military readiness, was criticized as targeting a 'politically unpopular group.'

An appeals court ruled that President Donald Trump's executive order suspending asylum access at the U.S.-Mexico border is illegal, affirming that immigration laws mandate asylum rights. The court emphasized the Immigration and Nationality Act does not permit the president to override mandatory removal procedures. A partial dissent from Trump-nominated Judge Justin Walker acknowledged asylum protections but supported broader denials of applications.

The Justice Department seeks to overturn seditious conspiracy convictions of Oath Keepers and Proud Boys leaders tied to the 2021 Capitol attack. The request aims to vacate convictions and dismiss indictments, following Trump's earlier clemency for some defendants.

A federal appeals court ruled that Judge James Boasberg must end his contempt investigation of the Trump administration's 2025 deportation flights to El Salvador. The majority opinion, authored by Judge Neomi Rao, stated the administration has a clear right to terminate the proceedings.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit lacks sufficient information to determine the extent of project suspension without compromising presidential safety. The court's decision focuses on balancing security risks with project halting measures.

A federal appeals court ordered a judge to reconsider national security risks of halting construction of Trump's $400 million White House ballroom, citing insufficient information on security impacts. The case was sent back to the trial judge after the court found the project's security features critical for protecting the president and staff.