Democratic attorneys general around the country were at the forefront of the legal battles that put up roadblocks to key parts of President Donald Trump’s sweeping agenda at the outset of his new administration.
Now, even as the initial rapid-fire onslaught of executive actions has slowed, they are vowing to keep up their aggressive — and coordinated — posture in the courts.
In a joint interview with NBC News, the Democratic attorneys general, Andrea Campbell of Massachusetts, Rob Bonta of California and Matthew Platkin of New Jersey, laid out their priorities for taking on the Trump administration in the latter half of 2025 and beyond. They said they are specifically looking at bolstering consumer protections, combating what they see as Trump’s weaponization of the federal government and stymying the administration’s immigration policies.
Since Trump’s inauguration, Democratic attorneys general have filed 30 lawsuits combined against the administration, focused on issues including immigration and due process, tariffs, federal worker layoffs and the dismantling of federal agencies. California has been a part of 25 of those lawsuits, compared to 21 for New Jersey and 20 for Massachusetts.
Campbell, Bonta and Platkin said they will remain vigilant in responding to new Trump policies while maintaining fights on critical areas stemming from the president’s first months in office.
“One thing I think we demonstrated in the first 100 days of this administration — and continue to — is that we are organized, we are strategic, and we’re unafraid to take on what’s coming, whether that be unlawful executive orders or standing up in court to defend our states’ interests, residents, economies and institutions,” Campbell said.
“This isn’t about policy or political differences,” Platkin noted. “That’s not the basis of a lawsuit.”
Rather, he said, “We will look at whether the president’s violating the law and hurting the residents of our state.”
A Trump administration spokesperson didn’t respond to questions for this article.
‘Weaponization’ of government agencies
One of the most prominent concerns held by these Democratic attorneys general is what they say is Trump’s weaponization of the government.
The Department of Government Efficiency has, for example, attempted to obtain access to sensitive Internal Revenue Service data that could jeopardize the personal information — including the home addresses and Social Security numbers — of federal workers and others. The data could also be used to target specific people with political retribution, and to push false narratives about undocumented immigrants and voter fraud allegations, critics have warned.
“We’re working closely to support some of these entities through existing lawsuits, whether directly filed by us or amicus briefs,” Campbell said.
She was among 19 attorneys general who sued DOGE in February “to protect the sensitive information of our constituents, including their IRS data, and ensure that these agencies were not weaponized against our people or against our residents or immigrants or weaponized against our nonprofit organizations or academic institutions,” she said.
Meanwhile, referring to efforts by Republicans and the Trump White House to target certain nonprofits by stripping them of their tax-exempt status, Bonta said it was “shocking and remarkable” that the administration might be able to go after such groups “they don’t agree with based on their viewpoint.”
He said such efforts ran the risk of violating those groups’ First Amendment rights, stating: “We will be watching closely what the IRS does — and honestly, any other weaponization.”
Immigration and due process
Democratic attorneys general have been especially active in fighting Trump’s efforts to detain and deport undocumented immigrants.
And while much of those initial efforts centered around litigation, Campbell said her office was going to double down on efforts to provide legal guidance to immigrant communities in her state so they better know how to avoid or handle such situations.
“The guidance and the work that we’re doing to ensure folks know what their rights are is just as important as the litigation that we are filing against the federal administration,” Campbell said. “That guidance will continue — and must. It will not slow down.”
Campbell said that, just last week, her office had released guidance to people who might be targeted in Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids related to “know what their rights are, when it comes to ICE and ICE enforcement and ICE showing up in their community.”
Consumer protections
Group members said they’d also be active on the issue of consumer protections after the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — the federal agency that had handled discipline of such abuses — was gutted by the Trump administration.
Campbell, as well Bonta and Platkin, said they’d continue to fight Trump’s attempted elimination of the agency, while also trying to do some of the work the bureau had overseen.
“Because we now do not have a partner at the federal level looking to advance consumer protection, more of these cases now fall on us,” Campbell said.
Law enforcement
Platkin, for his part, said he was concerned about how many of the Trump administration’s policies — especially ones related to withholding certain funding for states and related to guns — had put public safety at risk.
He mentioned cost-cutting measures across Trump’s Justice Department that resulted in the decimation of law enforcement and public safety grants.
In New Jersey, Platkin said that has resulted in “taking cops off the streets,” as well as the elimination of millions of dollars in funding for items like license plate reader technology, which he said has helped law enforcement officials in the state “to catch violent criminals and human traffickers and drug traffickers.”
Platkin also expressed concern about a settlement Trump’s Justice Department reached last month that would allow the sale of devices that enable standard firearms to fire like machine guns.
Platkin was involved in the litigation to fight sales of the devices — called forced reset triggers — and was now reviewing affirmative lawsuits on the matter.
“As the chief law enforcement officer of my state, one thing that has given me real concern is the risk to public safety that this administration’s policies have created,” he said.
Tariffs
While Democratic attorneys general have aggressively fought Trump’s tariffs, Bonta said the battle was far from over.
In addition to continuing the legal fight, he said he was going to closely watch to see whether corporations in his state might exploit the economic uncertainty surrounding Trump’s tariffs to unnecessarily raise prices.
“With respect to the tariffs — and corporations using that opportunity to harm consumers, to take advantage of them, potentially manipulate pricing — this is the bread and butter of what we do,” Bonta said. “We do it in non-Trump times. We do it in Trump times. We protect consumers against price gouging and junk fees and price fixing and anti competitive behavior.”
“It’s just what we do, and we will continue to do that,” he added.
Bonta warned that companies might see a unique opportunity “to jack up their prices and harm consumers” and that he and his colleagues would remain “vigilant in our ongoing efforts to protect consumers, whether it be due to a tariff excuse or some other type of cover, to harm consumers.”
Bonta, Campbell and Platkin also said they would remain flexible to deal with whatever the next phase of the Trump presidency brings.
“When posed with the question, you know, ‘What do we do next,’ really, the answer is: It depends on what the Trump administration does,” Bonta said.
“We’re monitoring all the things that he’s doing,” he added. “And when he crosses the threshold of taking an action that is unlawful and harming our states — meaning, we have standing to sue — then we sue — whatever it is.”
