As President Donald Trump moves forward with plans to build additional physical barriers along the southern border, his administration will have to contend with a slew of lawsuits challenging the national emergency declaration allowing him, in part, to do so.
So far, at least four lawsuits have been filed challenging the declaration. The argument at the core of each lawsuit is similar: Trump exceeded his authority and circumvented Congress in an attempt to achieve his signature campaign promise for an emergency that, plaintiffs argue, doesn't exist.
Here's a rundown of the lawsuits:
State of California et al. vs. Trump et al.
Plaintiffs: 16 states, led by California Attorney General Xavier Becerra.
The lawsuit seeks a preliminary injunction to halt the President's declaration. The complaint accuses Trump of carrying out an "unconstitutional and unlawful scheme," and describes how states "stand to lose millions in federal funding" and could "cause damage to their economies."
The complaint includes Trump's remark that he didn't need to declare the emergency.
Attorneys general from Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Virginia joined California in the lawsuit. All states, except Maryland, are led by Democratic governors.
Location: Northern District of California.
Judge: Elizabeth D. Laporte, Clinton appointee.
Status: Filed.
Center for Biological Diversity et al. vs. Trump et al.
Plaintiffs: The Center for Biological Diversity, Defenders of Wildlife and Animal Legal Defense Fund.
The lawsuit pushes back against the idea that the situation along the border is an emergency and argues that Trump unlawfully circumvented Congress to fund his border wall.
The complaint also alleges the border wall would harm the environment.
Location: US District Court for the District of Columbia.
Judge: Trevor N. McFadden, Trump appointee.
Status: Filed.
Alvarez et al. vs. Trump et al.
Plaintiffs: Advocacy group Public Citizen on behalf of the Frontera Audubon Society, a nature preserve in Texas, and three landowners in south Texas who were told the federal government would build on their properties if money were available in 2019.
The lawsuit says Trump exceeded his authority and the declaration violated the separation of powers.
The complaint also describes the alleged harm to three residents of Starr County who received notice from US Customs and Border Protection that their land could be seized for border security purposes. According to the lawsuit, the proposed border wall would cut through their property, which in some cases has been in the family for at least five generations.
The complaint alleges that Frontera Audubon Society would also be harmed because the proposed border wall would cut off access to the area and disrupt wildlife in the region.
Location: US District Court for the District of Columbia.
Judge: Trevor N. McFadden, Trump appointee.
Status: Filed.
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington vs. Department of Justice
Plaintiffs: Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.
CREW is suing the Justice Department not turning over legal opinions, communications and other documents related to Trump's national emergency declaration.
In January, CREW filed a Freedom of Information Act requests for documents from the Office of Legal Counsel, the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense relevant to discussions about a national emergency declaration.
The lawsuit requests that the Justice Department "immediately" provide the requested records.
Location: US District Court for the District of Columbia.
Judge: Tanya S. Chutkan, Obama appointee.
Status: Filed.
