Attorney General
Here's a look at documents from state attorneys general
Featured Stories
Attorney General Bonta Opposes Sable's Request for Special Permit to Waive Federal Safety Regulation
SACRAMENTO, California, April 6 -- California Attorney General Rob Bonta issued the following news release:
* * *
Attorney General Bonta Opposes Sable's Request for Special Permit to Waive Federal Safety Regulation
*
OAKLAND -California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a comment letter opposing the U.S. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)'s consideration of Sable Offshore Corp. (Sable)'s request for a special permit to waive a safety regulation and transport oil through Lines CA-324 and CA-325 in Santa Barbara and Kern counties. PHSMA illegally purports to assert
... Show Full Article
SACRAMENTO, California, April 6 -- California Attorney General Rob Bonta issued the following news release:
* * *
Attorney General Bonta Opposes Sable's Request for Special Permit to Waive Federal Safety Regulation
*
OAKLAND -California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a comment letter opposing the U.S. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)'s consideration of Sable Offshore Corp. (Sable)'s request for a special permit to waive a safety regulation and transport oil through Lines CA-324 and CA-325 in Santa Barbara and Kern counties. PHSMA illegally purports to assertexclusive federal jurisdiction over the onshore Lines CA-324 and CA-325 by reclassifying them as "interstate," and issued Sable an emergency permit waiving compliance with its own safety regulation requiring evaluation and remediation of pipeline corrosion. That emergency permit recently expired and is being challenged in ongoing litigation by the California Department of Justice, as is PHMSA's reclassification of the pipelines as interstate. In the comment letter, Attorney General Bonta argues that PHMSA is without jurisdiction to issue any special permit because the pipelines are intrastate, and therefore subject to state regulation by the Office of the State Fire Marshal (OSFM) rather than PHMSA.
"Let's be clear: we do not have a 'National Energy Emergency.' President Trump is simply prioritizing the fossil fuel industry, ensuring that they can continue to line their own pockets by illegally restarting oil transportation through California's pipelines at the expense of our public health and environment," said Attorney General Bonta. "We are making it crystal clear once again that these pipelines fall under California's jurisdiction, and the federal government cannot illegally help Sable evade state regulation and federal safety requirements by granting this permit."
On December 17, 2025, PHMSA illegally reclassified Lines CA-324 and CA-325 that run from Santa Barbara County to Kern County as "interstate." The reclassification purports to shift regulatory oversight of the pipelines from the OSFM to PHMSA. Before December 17, 2025, PHMSA had classified these onshore pipelines as intrastate pipelines subject to state safety regulation and oversight. On December 22, 2025, PHMSA approved Sable's plan to restart oil production based on President Trump's bogus "National Energy Emergency" Executive Order that Attorney General Bonta challenged. Just last month, the Attorney General challenged DOE Secretary Chris Wright's "Pipeline Capacity Prioritization and Allocation Order" (order) and is seeking to halt its use as the basis for Sable's unlawful restart of the pipelines. The order, improperly issued under the Defense Production Act (DPA), unlawfully purports to supersede state law, state court orders, and a federal court-approved Consent Decree to allow Sable to restart oil transport through the pipelines.
The onshore pipelines had been shut down for a decade since the 2015 Refugio Beach oil spill, when a corroded segment of one pipeline ruptured and released more than 120,000 gallons of crude oil near Santa Barbara, at least 21,000 gallons of which entered the Pacific Ocean. The oil spill caused serious harm to public health and safety including releasing hazardous oil and fumes that sickened communities, contaminated coastal waters, harmed hundreds of marine mammals and seabirds, and shut down beaches and fisheries for months -damaging local economies. It resulted in a Consent Decree -to which PHMSA is a party -that expressly acknowledges and approves the State Fire Marshal's role in reviewing and approving any planned restart of the onshore pipelines. PHMSA has significantly departed from this agreement, which was approved by a federal court, and the way in which PHMSA historically viewed the pipelines.
In the comment letter, the Attorney General asserts that:
* PHMSA has no authority to unilaterally modify or disregard the consent decree and cannot unilaterally assert regulatory jurisdiction over the pipelines.
* PHMSA has failed to justify the need for an emergency permit and lacks robust environmental analysis, including National Environmental Protection Act analysis.
* The DPA order does not impact this proceeding because PHMSA has no authority to grant Sable a special permit and the DPA Order itself is unlawful.
***
Original text here: https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bonta-opposes-sable%E2%80%99s-request-special-permit-waive-federal
AG Nessel Secures Agreement with Wedding Caterer Regarding Alleged Unlawful Business Practices, Refund Impacted Customers
LANSING, Michigan, April 6 -- Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel issued the following news release:
* * *
AG Nessel Secures Agreement with Wedding Caterer Regarding Alleged Unlawful Business Practices, Refund Impacted Customers
*
LANSING - Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel has secured an Assurance of Voluntary Compliance (AVC) with Alicia Thompson, owner and operator of Late to the Lake, LLC, a Michigan-based catering business (PDF), resolving allegations that the company engaged in deceptive and unlawful business practices in violation of the Michigan Consumer Protection Act (MCPA).
... Show Full Article
LANSING, Michigan, April 6 -- Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel issued the following news release:
* * *
AG Nessel Secures Agreement with Wedding Caterer Regarding Alleged Unlawful Business Practices, Refund Impacted Customers
*
LANSING - Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel has secured an Assurance of Voluntary Compliance (AVC) with Alicia Thompson, owner and operator of Late to the Lake, LLC, a Michigan-based catering business (PDF), resolving allegations that the company engaged in deceptive and unlawful business practices in violation of the Michigan Consumer Protection Act (MCPA).Under the agreement, Thompson is prohibited from engaging in catering services in the State of Michigan for 5 years. To the extent they qualify under the terms of the agreement, Thompson must also refund all impacted consumers who submitted a complaint with the Department of Attorney General by May 1. Refunds must be issued by July 1.
The Department of Attorney General has received more than 40 consumer complaints concerning Late to the Lake. The complaints alleged a concerning pattern of the caterer's last-minute cancellations of wedding services, followed by the company's failure to issue refunds to affected consumers.
In one instance, a Michigan consumer reported paying more than $6,000 for wedding catering services that were ultimately canceled without a refund. Another customer detailed being pressured to pay in full under the guise of sale pricing, only to have Late to the Lake cancel on the day of the rehearsal dinner. Some complaints alleged they were later charged more than the agreed-upon amount or discovered new charges on their accounts after services were canceled. When catering services were provided, a consumer reported serious deficiencies in service quality, unauthorized fees, and incomplete food delivery.
"A wedding is one of the most meaningful days of a person's life, and couples should be able to trust that their chosen vendor will deliver what they promised or at the very least refund them when something goes wrong," said Attorney General Nessel. "I am proud of my Consumer Protection Team for holding this caterer accountable and encourage those who believe they were impacted by Late to the Lake to file a complaint with my office by May 1 to ensure they receive a refund."
Michigan consumers who suspect they are owed a refund by Thompson are encouraged to contact the Department of Attorney General. To be considered for a refund, customers must file a complaint by May 1. Impacted consumers can contact the Consumer Protection Team at:
Consumer Protection Team
P.O. Box 30213
Lansing, MI 48909
517-335-7599
Fax: 517-241-3771
Toll-free: 877-765-8388
Online complaint form
***
Original text here: https://www.michigan.gov/ag/news/press-releases/2026/04/06/ag-nessel-secures-agreement-with-wedding-caterer
AG Campbell Announces Draft Regulations For Assisted Living Residences
BOSTON, Massachusetts, April 6 -- Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell issued the following news release:
* * *
AG Campbell Announces Draft Regulations For Assisted Living Residences
*
Boston -Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell today released draft regulations for Assisted Living Residences (ALRs) to protect residents from unfair and deceptive acts and practices, including misrepresentation of available services, improper fees, and unlawful evictions. The draft regulations, the first of their kind under the state's consumer protection law, were developed by the
... Show Full Article
BOSTON, Massachusetts, April 6 -- Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell issued the following news release:
* * *
AG Campbell Announces Draft Regulations For Assisted Living Residences
*
Boston -Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell today released draft regulations for Assisted Living Residences (ALRs) to protect residents from unfair and deceptive acts and practices, including misrepresentation of available services, improper fees, and unlawful evictions. The draft regulations, the first of their kind under the state's consumer protection law, were developed by theAttorney General's Office, and are informed by community concerns, including those voiced by community partners, elder law attorneys, and members of the Attorney General's Elder Justice Council.
The draft regulations will now enter a public comment period. After taking the public's feedback in account, the AGO anticipates releasing final regulations over the summer. Members of the public can provide comments to AGOregs@mass.gov, or by mail to One Ashburton Place, 20th Floor, Policy and Government Affairs Division, Boston, MA 02108, until 5:00pm on May 1, 2026. The AGO will also host a hybrid public hearing on the draft regulations on Wednesday, April 29, 2026, at 1:00 pm in the Conference Room located on the 2nd Floor of One Hundred Cambridge St, Boston, MA 02108 and virtually using this link.
"When our elders move into assisted living residences, they and their loved ones deserve safe accommodations and clear information about the costs they will pay and services offered," said AG Campbell. "These regulations will strengthen accountability to ensure that these facilities are fulfilling their commitments and help ensure older adults live with dignity and respect. I look forward to collaborating with community partners as we work to finalize and implement them."
Assisted living residences serve older adults who can live independently in a home-like setting, but may need assistance with daily activities such as housekeeping, bathing, or medication assistance. According to the Massachusetts Executive Office of Aging & Independence (AGE) more than 17,000 people currently live in the over 270 certified ALRs in Massachusetts.
In 2024, the AGO launched a public process to gather input on challenges facing assisted living residents. That feedback, as well as concerns reported to the AGO through consumer complaints, directly informed the development of the proposed regulations announced today. They focus on key areas of consumer protection, including financial protections and billing transparency, protection against misrepresentation of services, contractual and eviction protections, and complaint and reporting mechanisms.
Among other rules, the draft regulations state that:
* ALRs should have straightforward service agreements that clearly disclose the cost of services provided in the residence, as well as guidelines for when those costs may increase.
* Residents should have transparent information about what may happen if they cannot afford to remain in the ALR, or if they require advanced care that the ALR cannot provide.
* ALRs should provide clear information about the availability of nursing care at the residence.
* Residents in ALRs have the same rights as other tenants, including protections related to fees, eviction, and other tenancy matters.
Chapter 93A, the consumer protection statute, authorizes the Attorney General to promulgate regulations to protect consumers. These regulations can require that facilities make certain disclosures about their contractual terms, and they also can declare certain acts and practices to be unlawful.
These new consumer protection regulations complement the recent proposed amendments to regulations pertaining to Assisted Living Residences by the Executive Office of Aging & Independence (AGE).
The promulgation of these regulations is led by Assistant Attorney General Andrew Musgrave, Director Mary Freeley and Deputy Director Valerie Frias of the AGO's Elder Justice Unit with assistance from Assistant Attorney General Thomas Furlong. AG Campbell created the Elder Justice Unit in August 2023 to protect and promote the safety and well-being of older adults through enforcement actions, legislative advocacy, and community engagement and education.
* Office of the Attorney General
The Attorney General is the chief lawyer and law enforcement officer of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
***
Original text here: https://www.mass.gov/news/ag-campbell-announces-draft-regulations-for-assisted-living-residences
Va. A.G.'s Office Successfully Prosecutes Cocaine and Heroin Trafficking Conspiracy Distribution Case, Resulting in Conviction
RICHMOND, Virginia, April 4 -- Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones issued the following news release on April 3, 2026:
* * *
Virginia Attorney General's Office Successfully Prosecutes Cocaine and Heroin Trafficking Conspiracy Distribution Case, Resulting in Conviction
NORFOLK, Va - Today, Virginia Attorney General applauds Assistant Attorney General/Special Assistant United States Attorney Kelly Cournoyer for her role in securing a conviction in a Norfolk, Virginia cocaine and heroin trafficking conspiracy distribution case.
Brehon Kanell Davis was found guilty on charges of conspiracy to distribute
... Show Full Article
RICHMOND, Virginia, April 4 -- Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones issued the following news release on April 3, 2026:
* * *
Virginia Attorney General's Office Successfully Prosecutes Cocaine and Heroin Trafficking Conspiracy Distribution Case, Resulting in Conviction
NORFOLK, Va - Today, Virginia Attorney General applauds Assistant Attorney General/Special Assistant United States Attorney Kelly Cournoyer for her role in securing a conviction in a Norfolk, Virginia cocaine and heroin trafficking conspiracy distribution case.
Brehon Kanell Davis was found guilty on charges of conspiracy to distributeand possess with intent to distribute cocaine and heroin. Davis was further convicted on two counts of possession with intent to distribute cocaine and cocaine base
"Fentanyl and other illegal drugs are destroying the lives of Virginians and harming our communities. When someone brings these substances into our state, they will be held accountable for the damage," said Attorney General Jay Jones. "Fighting for the safety and well-being of Virginia sits at the core of this office. I'm proud of the work my office put into this case and for what continues to be done to keep Virginian's safe."
According to evidence presented at trial, from at least April 2021 to December 2023, Davis' co-conspirators obtained cocaine, heroin, fentanyl, and parafluorofentanyl from out-of-state and had it shipped in whole-sale quantities to Virginia. From there, Davis and others distributed the drugs in Norfolk. They used internet payment services, such as Cash App, to pay for the narcotics.
Davis will be sentenced on July 28, 2026 and faces up to ten years in prison.
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Washington Field Division, the FBI's Norfolk Field Office, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) Washington, D.C., the U.S. Marshals Service, and the Norfolk Police Department investigated this case with assistance from the Federal Bureau of Prisons.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Darryl J. Mitchell and Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Kelly A. Cournoyer are prosecuted this case. Former Assistant U.S. Attorney Anthony Marek and former Special Assistant U.S. Attorneys Graham Stolle and Marc W. West assisted in the prosecution.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.oag.state.va.us/media-center/news-releases/2998-virginia-attorney-generals-office-successfully-prosecutes-cocaine-and-heroin-trafficking-conspiracy-distribution-case-resulting-in-conviction
Va. A.G. Jones Sues Trump Administration Over Unlawful Executive Order Attempting to Exert Federal Control Over Elections
RICHMOND, Virginia, April 4 -- Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones issued the following news release on April 3, 2026:
* * *
ATTORNEY GENERAL JAY JONES SUES TRUMP ADMINISTRATION OVER UNLAWFUL EXECUTIVE ORDER ATTEMPTING TO EXERT FEDERAL CONTROL OVER ELECTIONS
Executive Order Threatens to Disenfranchise Eligible Voters and Violates States' Authority to Administer Elections
*
Attorney General Jay Jones today joined a coalition of 21 attorneys general in suing President Trump in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, challenging his unlawful Executive Order that attempts to
... Show Full Article
RICHMOND, Virginia, April 4 -- Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones issued the following news release on April 3, 2026:
* * *
ATTORNEY GENERAL JAY JONES SUES TRUMP ADMINISTRATION OVER UNLAWFUL EXECUTIVE ORDER ATTEMPTING TO EXERT FEDERAL CONTROL OVER ELECTIONS
Executive Order Threatens to Disenfranchise Eligible Voters and Violates States' Authority to Administer Elections
*
Attorney General Jay Jones today joined a coalition of 21 attorneys general in suing President Trump in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, challenging his unlawful Executive Order that attempts tointerfere with states' constitutional authority to administer elections by restricting voter eligibility and mail voting to lists of voters pre-authorized by the federal government.
"This is a blatant attempt by Donald Trump to sow confusion and distrust in our democratic processes and to influence the midterm elections for his own personal gain," said Attorney General Jay Jones. "This order does not affect balloting for the April 21 referendum, but if left in place it will disenfranchise voters in the November election. This fearmongering and arrogation of States' authority is plainly unconstitutional. I'm proud to join attorneys general across the country in defending the right to the franchise and to use every legal tool available to us to stop the president's illegal power grab."
On March 31, President Trump signed an Executive Order attempting to establish a national list of eligible voters and directing the U.S. Postal Service, an independent federal agency, to transmit mail ballots only to those on the list. In the Order, the President threatens states and elections officials with criminal prosecution and the loss of federal funding if they do not comply with his demands. The attorneys general argue that the Order would require states to act contrary to their own voter roll procedures, vote-by-mail systems, and voter registration laws.
State and federal law entitle all eligible voters to cast ballots and have their votes counted in state and federal elections. The states filing this lawsuit permit registered voters to cast their ballots by mail if they meet their state's requirements for doing so. Voters of all parties, in all states, and of every demographic utilize mail-in voting - including the President himself.
In their lawsuit, the coalition explains that the U.S. Constitution gives states the primary authority to administer elections. In contrast, the Constitution does not allow the President to unilaterally impose changes to federal election procedures, particularly without an act of Congress permitting him to do so.
Moreover, the administration of elections is highly complex and requires substantial planning and preparation. The attorneys general argue that the President's Executive Order would require states to upend their existing election administration procedures for upcoming elections and conduct statewide voter education at a dangerously quick pace - potentially within weeks of primary elections and mere months before the beginning of mail voting for the 2026 general election. The coalition argues that such drastic and rapid changes will undoubtedly create confusion, chaos, and distrust in state election systems, all while threatening to disenfranchise eligible voters.
With Virginia holding elections every year, and voting underway for Virginia's April 21 referendum, maintaining an accessible and locally administered balloting process is paramount to our democracy. Virginia election officials are our friends and neighbors in communities across the Commonwealth working at this moment to deliver another election that's free, fair, safe, and secure. They'll make sure every eligible vote, and only every eligible vote, is counted. Virginians should feel confident that their vote is secure for the election currently underway and will remain so for every election going forward.
The attorneys general allege that the President's Executive Order violates the separation of powers and unlawfully interferes with states' mail voting programs. The coalition asks the court to prevent the federal government from implementing or enforcing the Executive Order.
Joining AG Jay Jones in filing this lawsuit, which was led by Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell, California Attorney General Rob Bonta, Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford, and Washington Attorney General Nick Brown, are the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.oag.state.va.us/media-center/news-releases/2997-attorney-general-jay-jones-sues-trump-administration-over-unlawful-executive-orderattempting-to-exert-federal-control-over-elections
R.I. A.G. Neronha, Coalition Sue Trump Administration Over Unlawful Executive Order Attempting to Exert Federal Control Over Elections
PROVIDENCE, Rhode Island, April 4 -- Rhode Island Attorney General Peter F. Neronha issued the following news release on April 3, 2026:
* * *
Attorney General Neronha, coalition sue Trump Administration over unlawful executive order attempting to exert federal control over elections
Attorney General Peter F. Neronha today joined a coalition of 23 attorneys general and one governor in announcing a lawsuit against President Trump in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, challenging his unlawful Executive Order that attempts to interfere with states' constitutional authority
... Show Full Article
PROVIDENCE, Rhode Island, April 4 -- Rhode Island Attorney General Peter F. Neronha issued the following news release on April 3, 2026:
* * *
Attorney General Neronha, coalition sue Trump Administration over unlawful executive order attempting to exert federal control over elections
Attorney General Peter F. Neronha today joined a coalition of 23 attorneys general and one governor in announcing a lawsuit against President Trump in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, challenging his unlawful Executive Order that attempts to interfere with states' constitutional authorityto administer elections by restricting voter eligibility and mail voting to lists of voters pre-authorized by the federal government. The lawsuit will be filed in the District of Massachusetts later today.
As alleged in the complaint, the Executive Order would purportedly require states to act contrary to their own voter roll procedures, vote-by-mail systems, and voter registration laws.
"With the stroke of a pen, this President is attempting to undermine elections and sidestep the deeply rooted authority of states to administer elections," said Attorney General Neronha. "This President cannot be permitted to bypass the Constitution by threatening officials and withholding congressionally approved funding, as we have proved in court time and time again. With upcoming elections deciding our next leaders, from city council to Congress, we will not jeopardize the integrity of our democratic process to appease the individual at the helm of the executive branch. This is a direct attack on the central pillar of our democracy, and we will not let this Administration restrict Rhode Islanders' right to vote."
On March 31, President Trump signed an Executive Order attempting to establish a national list of eligible voters and directing the U.S. Postal Service, an independent federal agency, to transmit mail ballots only to those on the list. In the Order, the President threatens states and elections officials with criminal prosecution and the loss of federal funding if they do not comply with his demands.
State and federal law entitle all eligible voters to cast ballots and have their votes counted in state and federal elections. The states filing this lawsuit, including Rhode Island, permit registered voters to cast their ballots by mail if they meet their state's requirements for doing so. Voters of all parties, in all states, and of every demographic utilize mail-in voting - including the President himself.
In their lawsuit, the coalition argues that the U.S. Constitution gives states the primary authority to administer elections. Moreover, the President cannot unilaterally change federal election procedures, particularly without an act of Congress permitting him to do so.
The administration of elections is highly complex and requires substantial planning and preparation. The attorneys general argue that the President's Executive Order would require states to upend their existing election administration procedures for upcoming elections and conduct statewide voter education at a dangerously quick pace - potentially within weeks of primary elections and mere months before the beginning of mail voting for the 2026 general election. Such drastic and rapid changes will undoubtedly create confusion, chaos, and distrust in state election systems, all while threatening to disenfranchise eligible voters.
The complaint further alleges that the President's Executive Order violates the separation of powers and unlawfully interferes with states' mail voting programs. The coalition asks the court to declare the challenged provisions of the Executive Order unconstitutional and void, and enjoin the federal government from implementing or enforcing the Executive Order.
Joining Attorney General Neronha in filing this lawsuit are the attorneys general of Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Colombia, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin, as well as the Governor of Pennsylvania.
* * *
Original text here: https://riag.ri.gov/press-releases/attorney-general-neronha-coalition-sue-trump-administration-over-unlawful-executive
N.J. A.G. Davenport Sues Trump Administration Over Unlawful Executive Order Attempting to Exert Federal Control Over Elections
TRENTON, New Jersey, April 4 -- New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport issued the following news release on April 3, 2026:
* * *
AG Davenport Sues Trump Administration Over Unlawful Executive Order Attempting to Exert Federal Control Over Elections
Executive Order Threatens to Disenfranchise Eligible Voters and Violates States' Authority to Administer Elections
View Complaint (https://www.njoag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/2026-0403-California-v-Trump-Complaint.pdf)
*
Attorney General Jennifer Davenport today joined a coalition of 23 attorneys general and one governor in suing President
... Show Full Article
TRENTON, New Jersey, April 4 -- New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport issued the following news release on April 3, 2026:
* * *
AG Davenport Sues Trump Administration Over Unlawful Executive Order Attempting to Exert Federal Control Over Elections
Executive Order Threatens to Disenfranchise Eligible Voters and Violates States' Authority to Administer Elections
View Complaint (https://www.njoag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/2026-0403-California-v-Trump-Complaint.pdf)
*
Attorney General Jennifer Davenport today joined a coalition of 23 attorneys general and one governor in suing PresidentTrump in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, challenging his unlawful Executive Order. The Executive Order attempts to interfere with states' constitutional authority to administer elections by restricting voter eligibility and mail-in voting to lists of voters pre-authorized by the federal government.
"The Constitution makes clear that states administer elections in America - not the federal government," said Attorney General Davenport. "Changes to election rules cannot be made by the President through a blatantly unlawful executive order that seeks to disenfranchise voters in the name of debunked conspiracy theories about widespread fraud from voting by mail. Americans trust their local and state officials to run free, fair, and secure elections. We are confident the courts will reject this blatant power grab."
On March 31, President Trump signed an Executive Order attempting to establish a national list of eligible voters and directing the U.S. Postal Service, an independent federal agency, to transmit mail ballots only to those on the list. In the Order, the President threatens states and elections officials with criminal prosecution and the loss of federal funding if they do not comply with his demands. But, the attorneys general argue, the Order would require states to act contrary to their own voter roll procedures, vote-by-mail systems, and voter registration laws.
The U.S. Constitution gives states the primary authority to administer elections. It does not allow the President to unilaterally impose changes to federal election procedures, particularly without an act of Congress permitting him to do so.
State and federal law entitle all eligible voters to cast ballots and have their votes counted in state and federal elections. The states filing this lawsuit permit registered voters to cast their ballots by mail if they meet their state's requirements for doing so. Voters of all parties, in all states, and of every demographic utilize mail-in voting - including the President himself.
The administration of elections is highly complex and requires substantial planning and preparation. The attorneys general argue that the President's Executive Order would require states to upend their existing election administration procedures for upcoming elections and conduct statewide voter education at a dangerously quick pace - potentially within weeks of primary elections and mere months before the beginning of mail voting for the 2026 general election. Such drastic and rapid changes will create confusion, chaos, and distrust in state election systems, all while threatening to disenfranchise eligible voters.
New Jersey has allowed by voting by mail - once called absentee voting - for decades. It has become increasingly popular among voters, accounting for 20% to 30% of votes cast in general elections in the state over the last five years. Security features on vote-by-mail ballots include a unique barcode and voter ID on the ballot envelope and prepaid postage return envelope. Mail-in voters also are required to complete a certification, and their signatures are compared with the voter's signature in the voter registration system.
The attorneys general allege that the President's Executive Order violates the separation of powers and unlawfully interferes with states' mail voting programs. The coalition asks the court to prevent the federal government from implementing or enforcing the Executive Order.
Attorney General Davenport is joined in the lawsuit by the attorneys general of California, Massachusetts, Nevada, Washington, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia, and the Governor of Pennsylvania.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.njoag.gov/ag-davenport-sues-trump-administration-over-unlawful-executive-order-attempting-to-exert-federal-control-over-elections/
N.J. A.G. Davenport Co-Leads Amicus Brief Against Trump Administration's Targeting of Law Firms
TRENTON, New Jersey, April 4 -- New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport issued the following news release on April 3, 2026:
* * *
Attorney General Davenport Co-Leads Amicus Brief Against Trump Administration's Targeting of Law Firms
Multistate Coalition Asks Court of Appeals to Defend Rule of Law
View Amicus Brief (https://www.njoag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/2026-0403_As-Filed-Multistate-Brief-Law-Firm-EO-Appeals.pdf)
*
Attorney General Jennifer Davenport co-led a coalition of 21 attorneys general in an amicus brief filed today in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals supporting four
... Show Full Article
TRENTON, New Jersey, April 4 -- New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport issued the following news release on April 3, 2026:
* * *
Attorney General Davenport Co-Leads Amicus Brief Against Trump Administration's Targeting of Law Firms
Multistate Coalition Asks Court of Appeals to Defend Rule of Law
View Amicus Brief (https://www.njoag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/2026-0403_As-Filed-Multistate-Brief-Law-Firm-EO-Appeals.pdf)
*
Attorney General Jennifer Davenport co-led a coalition of 21 attorneys general in an amicus brief filed today in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals supporting fourlaw firms that were targeted by President Trump in a series of unprecedented, unconstitutional executive orders in 2025.
The law firms -- Jenner & Block LLP, Perkins Coie LLP, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale LLP, and Susman Godfrey LLP -- are challenging these unconstitutional executive orders, which imposed severe sanctions on the firms in direct retaliation for their work on causes disfavored by the Trump Administration.
"It is darkly ironic, frankly, that during America's 250th anniversary, President Trump is continuing his crusade to rip apart the very foundations of the rule of law embedded in the Constitution," said Attorney General Davenport. "The legal profession depends on attorneys being able to represent clients independent of political pressure. If this isn't true, and law firms can't practice without fear of being punished by the President, what remains of the rule of law? We must fight back."
In March and April 2025, President Trump issued executive orders retaliating against law firms whose advocacy, clients, and personnel he dislikes, for purely political reasons. These orders required federal officials to suspend any active security clearances held by individuals at the law firms, to refuse to engage with or hire employees of these firms, and to deny the law firms' personnel entry to federal buildings. The orders also directed federal contractors to disclose any business they do with the law firms so that agencies can terminate any contract with the firms.
Four different district judges have recognized that these executive orders are unconstitutional in several respects, including because they are retaliatory and viewpoint discriminatory in violation of the First Amendment. In particular, the orders seek to punish the law firms for purportedly supporting the President's political opponents, for defending the integrity of the 2020 election, for their commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion, and for their expression of other disfavored viewpoints.
As the amici states write, the willingness of lawyers to represent such causes without fear of reprisal is vital for the rule of law, our system of justice, and our democracy. The executive orders threaten this foundational principle, and the Court of Appeals must affirm the district court orders, the brief states.
If the orders are allowed to stand, states and their residents will suffer harm by making it more difficult for many potential clients--especially those who currently rely on pro bono representation--to obtain legal services and vindicate their rights in court. The brief notes several instances where this is already happening.
The amicus brief argues that the administration's unconstitutional actions are a gross abuse of authority and that they threaten the rule of law. A fair and functioning judicial system depends on lawyers being willing to work on controversial cases or represent unpopular clients without fearing retribution by the federal government.
The coalition was led by Attorney General Davenport, Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul, Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell, and Washington Attorney General Nick Brown. Joining them are the attorneys general of Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and the District of Columbia.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.njoag.gov/attorney-general-davenport-co-leads-amicus-brief-against-trump-administrations-targeting-of-law-firms/
Md. A.G. Brown Supports Law Firms Targeted for Retribution by Trump Administration
BALTIMORE, Maryland, April 4 -- Maryland Attorney General Anthony G. Brown issued the following news release on April 3, 2026:
* * *
Attorney General Brown Supports Law Firms Targeted for Retribution by Trump Administration
Coalition Files Brief Backing Challenge of Unconstitutional Executive Orders that Undermine the Rule of Law
*
Attorney General Anthony G. Brown joined a coalition of 20 attorneys general today in filing an amicus brief supporting law firms challenging unconstitutional executive orders that imposed severe sanctions on the firms in retaliation for doing work disfavored by
... Show Full Article
BALTIMORE, Maryland, April 4 -- Maryland Attorney General Anthony G. Brown issued the following news release on April 3, 2026:
* * *
Attorney General Brown Supports Law Firms Targeted for Retribution by Trump Administration
Coalition Files Brief Backing Challenge of Unconstitutional Executive Orders that Undermine the Rule of Law
*
Attorney General Anthony G. Brown joined a coalition of 20 attorneys general today in filing an amicus brief supporting law firms challenging unconstitutional executive orders that imposed severe sanctions on the firms in retaliation for doing work disfavored bythe Trump administration.
"No administration should be able to punish lawyers for representing clients or taking positions it finds inconvenient," said Attorney General Brown. "When the government silences legal advocates, it silences the people who depend on them, and that is a threat that we have a duty to oppose."
In March and April of 2025, President Donald Trump issued executive orders retaliating against law firms whose advocacy, clients, and personnel he dislikes. These orders required federal officials to suspend any active security clearances held by individuals at the law firms, to refuse to engage with or hire employees of these firms, and to deny the law firms' personnel entry to federal buildings. The orders also directed federal contractors to disclose any business they do with the law firms so that agencies can terminate any contract with the firms.
Each of the targeted law firms that challenged the executive orders was successful, and now the administration has appealed those decisions. The coalition filed a brief in support of the law firms in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
Attorney General Brown and the coalition argue that the administration's unconstitutional actions are a gross abuse of authority, threaten the rule of law, and violate the First Amendment. They note that a fair and functioning judicial system depends on lawyers being willing to work on controversial cases or represent unpopular clients without fearing retribution by the government. The attorneys general further argue that the orders will harm the residents of their states by making it more difficult for many potential clients - especially those who currently rely on pro bono representation - to obtain legal services and vindicate their rights in court.
Joining Attorney General Brown in filing the brief are the attorneys general of Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington.
* * *
Original text here: https://oag.maryland.gov/News/pages/Attorney-General-Brown-Supports-Law-Firms-Targeted-for-Retribution-by-Trump-Administration--.aspx
Ariz. A.G. Mayes and Secretary of State Fontes Sue Trump Administration Over Unlawful Executive Order Attempting to Exert Federal Control Over Elections
PHOENIX, Arizona, April 4 -- Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes issued the following news release on April 3, 2026:
* * *
Attorney General Mayes and Secretary of State Fontes Sue Trump Administration over Unlawful Executive Order Attempting to Exert Federal Control over Elections
Arizona today joined a coalition of 23 other states suing President Trump in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, challenging his unlawful Executive Order that attempts to interfere with states' constitutional authority to administer elections by restricting voter eligibility and mail voting to
... Show Full Article
PHOENIX, Arizona, April 4 -- Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes issued the following news release on April 3, 2026:
* * *
Attorney General Mayes and Secretary of State Fontes Sue Trump Administration over Unlawful Executive Order Attempting to Exert Federal Control over Elections
Arizona today joined a coalition of 23 other states suing President Trump in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, challenging his unlawful Executive Order that attempts to interfere with states' constitutional authority to administer elections by restricting voter eligibility and mail voting tolists of voters pre-authorized by the federal government.
"Millions of Independents, Republicans, and Democrats across Arizona have voted by mail for decades," said Attorney General Mayes. "In fact, over 80% of Arizona voters cast their ballots this way election after election. Military families vote by mail. Rural Arizonans vote by mail. Tribal members vote by mail. Donald Trump's executive order targets all of these voters. But the Constitution is absolutely clear: states run their elections. Not the President. And Arizona will not allow the federal government to seize control of our elections."
"The greatest threat to the safety and security of our elections is Donald Trump continuing to lie about them," Secretary of State Adrian Fontes stated. "Arizona's elections are run by Arizonans-our neighbors, our friends, and our family. This latest attack on vote-by-mail and voter privacy, is a direct attack not just on our voters but on our election administrators who work day-in and day-out to keep democracy running. For decades, Arizona's mail-in voting system has operated as the gold standard, serving the vast majority of voters each election season. It is critical that we reject the notion that access and security are mutually exclusive when it comes to running strong elections."
On March 31, President Trump signed an Executive Order attempting to establish a national list of eligible voters and directing the U.S. Postal Service, an independent federal agency, to transmit mail ballots only to those on the list. In the Order, the President threatens states and elections officials with criminal prosecution and the loss of federal funding if they do not comply with his demands. The attorneys general argue that the Order would require states to act contrary to their own voter roll procedures, vote-by-mail systems, and voter registration laws.
State and federal law entitle all eligible voters to cast ballots and have their votes counted in state and federal elections. The states filing this lawsuit permit registered voters to cast their ballots by mail if they meet their state's requirements for doing so. Voters of all parties, in all states, and of every demographic utilize mail-in voting - including the President himself.
In their lawsuit, the coalition explains that the U.S. Constitution gives states the primary authority to administer elections. In contrast, the Constitution does not allow the President to unilaterally impose changes to federal election procedures, particularly without an act of Congress permitting him to do so.
Moreover, the administration of elections is highly complex and requires substantial planning and preparation. The attorneys general argue that the President's Executive Order would require states to upend their existing election administration procedures for upcoming elections and conduct statewide voter education at a dangerously quick pace - potentially within weeks of primary elections and mere months before the beginning of mail voting for the 2026 general election. The coalition argues that such drastic and rapid changes will undoubtedly create confusion, chaos, and distrust in state election systems, all while threatening to disenfranchise eligible voters.
No excuse vote-by-mail was passed in Arizona in 1991, created by a Republican legislature and signed into law by a Republican governor. Arizona then doubled down on our innovative expansion of early voting options in 2007, ensuring that all eligible voters had the ability to automatically and permanently receive their ballot by mail.
The attorneys general allege that the President's Executive Order violates the separation of powers and unlawfully interferes with states' mail voting programs. The coalition asks the court to prevent the federal government from implementing or enforcing the Executive Order.
Joining Attorney General Mayes in filing this lawsuit, which was led by Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell, California Attorney General Rob Bonta, Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford, and Washington Attorney General Nick Brown, are the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Wisconsin, and the Governor of Pennsylvania.
A copy of the complaint is available below.
* * *
Attachments
1. 2026.04.03 - Cal (https://www.azag.gov/sites/default/files/2026-04/1.%202026.04.03%20-%20California%20v%20Trump%20-%20Complaint.pdf)
* * *
Original text here: https://www.azag.gov/press-release/attorney-general-mayes-and-secretary-state-fontes-sue-trump-administration-over
