federal courts

Federal courts can issue injunctions ordering executive-branch actions to cease, and judges can stay (put on hold) those injunctions for a limited period to permit an appeal.

Federal courts in the United States have the authority to issue injunctions that halt National Guard or federal troop deployments within U.S. jurisdictions and can stay those injunctions temporarily to allow for appeals.

State and federal courts have the legal authority to temporarily block or enjoin National Guard deployments when judges determine those deployments exceed executive authority or are unlawful.

Federal courts have the authority to enjoin or block deployments of federalized National Guard troops from conducting operations in city streets when state or local governments bring legal challenges.

State criminal convictions and sentences can remain in effect independently of related federal convictions, so a person can continue serving a state-imposed prison term even if a federal conviction is overturned.

Availability and timing of SNAP benefit payments depend on federal funding and administrative decisions and can be affected by federal court rulings or other federal actions; states may choose to advance funds to maintain benefit continuity.

Federal courts have the authority to order the executive branch to disburse federal benefits during a government shutdown.

If a court determines that tariffs imposed by the executive branch are unlawful, resolving remedies can require remanding the matter to lower courts and can create complex administrative challenges around refunding collected tariff revenues.

A federal government shutdown, by causing lapses in appropriations, can limit federal agencies' ability to litigate or continue litigation, and courts may grant stays or pauses in proceedings at the government's request until appropriations are restored by Congress.

Appellate courts have the authority to stay lower-court orders or pause ongoing proceedings pending the outcome of an appeal.

Federal courts can issue rulings that pause planned layoffs of federal workers during a government shutdown.

Federal courts have the authority to issue temporary restraining orders or injunctions that can block or delay federal executive actions, including deployments of troops to a state.

In 2025, several federal courts found that federal activations of National Guard troops for domestic operations related to immigration enforcement departed from the Guard’s historic role and were unconstitutional in those cases.

There is a legal debate about whether a candidate's realistic chance of winning an election should be considered when determining whether the candidate has standing to sue over election rules.

The President of the United States serves as commander-in-chief and has authority to deploy federal troops and to federalize National Guard units for domestic operations, but those deployments are subject to legal challenge and review by federal courts.

State governments can sue in federal court to seek injunctions or other relief aimed at blocking or limiting federal deployments of National Guard units or other federal forces within their jurisdictions.

Plans to deploy National Guard troops to U.S. cities can prompt federal court litigation over the limits of presidential authority.

State governments can file lawsuits in federal court to challenge federal executive-branch actions related to domestic troop deployments.

Federal courts can temporarily block federal efforts to deploy or federalize National Guard units by ruling that the government has not met applicable legal thresholds, such as demonstrating that protests constitute a rebellion.

Federal courts can grant temporary restraining orders that temporarily block federal agencies from implementing personnel actions such as furloughs or terminations.

Federal courts can, in some cases, extend the terms of interim U.S. Attorneys.

In federal criminal proceedings, a defendant seeking release on bond pending appeal must demonstrate a substantial question of law or fact material to the appeal that justifies release.

Federal courts can vacate or invalidate agency regulations when a court determines that a federal agency exceeded its statutory authority by redefining statutory terms or acting beyond the scope Congress authorized.

Federal courts have the authority to issue preliminary injunctions and permanent injunctions that block enforcement of executive orders or other executive-branch actions.

A request to transfer a criminal prosecution from state court to federal court typically must be made within 30 days of the defendant's arraignment unless a court finds 'good cause' to allow a later filing.

In the United States, individuals can be prosecuted and convicted in both state courts and federal courts for related criminal conduct, resulting in separate convictions and sentences (for example, a state murder conviction and a federal hate crime conviction).

Federal courts have the authority to review state congressional redistricting plans, to issue injunctions blocking their implementation, and to conduct trials adjudicating claims such as racial gerrymandering.

In complex federal criminal cases with many defendants, prosecutors may file motions asking a court to divide defendants into smaller groups for separate status conferences for reasons of convenience.

Federal courts may deny pretrial release (bail) to defendants whom prosecutors allege have strong ties to organized crime.

A federal court can dismiss criminal charges when a prosecutor is found to have been unlawfully appointed to the prosecutorial role.