America First Legal, a nonprofit founded by Trump adviser Stephen Miller, is urging House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan to open a congressional investigation into what it calls a "nationwide pattern" of lawsuits filed by Democrat-controlled states against the Trump administration.
In a letter to Jordan, R-Ohio, AFL legal counsel Will Scolinos wrote that blue states have filed lawsuits challenging Trump administration policies "without being able to show any actual cause" or evidence supporting their claimed injuries.
The group says its investigation found that many states filing lawsuits against the administration have failed to produce records substantiating their claims, raising questions about whether the litigation is filed in good faith or designed to obstruct Trump administration policies through judicial intervention.
What the Left Is Saying
Progressives and legal scholars have dismissed the AFL's letter as a politically motivated attack on the rule of law. Critics note that states have a constitutional right to challenge federal policies they believe violate the Constitution or harm their residents.
Democratic attorneys general have defended their lawsuits as necessary checks on executive power. California, New York, Minnesota and Colorado — among the states targeted by AFL — have argued that Trump administration policies violate federal law, the Constitution and administrative procedure.
Civil liberties advocates have also pushed back on the term "lawfare," arguing that it criminalizes normal legal discourse. The use of courts to challenge government actions, they say, is a fundamental democratic right, not a weaponized tactic.
What the Right Is Saying
America First Legal frames the state lawsuits as an abuse of the judicial system designed to thwart policies supported by voters in the 2024 election. The group argues that states are filing speculative claims without concrete evidence of harm.
In its letter, AFL cited specific examples: four states that sued over transgender policies "lacked records" to substantiate their claims, and five of 20 states in a Medicaid data access lawsuit could not provide requested records. The group argues this demonstrates lawsuits filed without genuine legal basis.
Jordan's committee spokesperson told Fox News Digital: "We appreciate this tremendous work from America First Legal. We are evaluating the report and everything is on the table," suggesting the committee may consider issuing subpoenas or holding hearings on state litigation practices.
What the Numbers Show
According to Lawfare Media's litigation tracker, there are over 200 active cases currently challenging various Trump administration policies. Dozens of those cases have been filed by states including California, Colorado, Minnesota and New York.
The AFL letter specifically cited 20 states that joined a lawsuit over DHS access to federal Medicaid data, with five states telling AFL they could not provide records in response to the group's inquiries.
The lawsuits span multiple policy areas including immigration enforcement, transgender policies, education funding and federal spending freezes. Courts have issued mixed rulings, with some judges granting temporary blocks on administration actions.
The Bottom Line
The request for a congressional investigation marks an escalation in the ongoing legal battle between blue states and the Trump administration. If Jordan's committee moves forward with a probe, it could examine whether federal rules on standing — the legal requirement to demonstrate actual harm — should be applied more strictly to state lawsuits.
The committee has jurisdiction over Title 28 and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, giving Jordan authority to examine litigation practices. A spokesperson said the committee is "evaluating" AFL's report.
What's next: Watch for whether Jordan schedules a hearing on state litigation practices, issues document requests to state attorneys general, or proposes legislative changes to standing requirements in federal cases. The Democratic attorneys general targeted by AFL are likely to contest any investigation as politically motivated.