Please click here to opt in to receive the Executive Functions Roundup via email and to subscribe to Executive Functions.
The FBI has opened an investigation into six Democratic lawmakers for recording a video in which they called upon service members to “refuse illegal orders.” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has also directed the Pentagon to investigate whether Sen. Mark Kelly, a retired naval officer, committed misconduct by participating in the video. (WSJ.) Missy Ryan, Yvonne Wingett Sanchez, and Nancy A. Youssef wrote that the investigation into Kelly signifies an extension of President Trump’s “retribution campaign to the machinery of military justice.” (The Atlantic.)
The Education Department is investigating UC Berkeley after a student protest of a Turning Point USA event in September turned “unruly and violent.” (NYT.)
In Judge James Boasberg’s (D.D.C) contempt inquiry regarding the administration’s handling of Alien Enemies Act-based deportation flights to El Salvador, the Justice Department disclosed that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem was responsible for “direct[ing]” the transfer of AEA detainees to Salvadoran custody after Judge Boasberg ordered the flights “to be returned to the United States.” (Politico.) (Filing.) As part of the inquiry, Judge Boasberg also issued an order requesting “proposals” for how the inquiry should proceed, “including names of possible witnesses.” Among the “potential witnesses” named by the lawyers representing the plaintiffs include now-Judge Emil Bove, as well as other senior DOJ officials. (Law Dork.)
The defamation suit filed against The Guardian by Trump Media & Technology Group Corp. was dismissed by Florida state court Judge Hunter Carroll with leave to amend. (Order.)
Benjamin Wittes argued that the dismissal of criminal charges against James Comey and Letitia James on the basis of a particular statute leaves important questions unresolved by the courts that are central to protecting democracy. He also called for defense attorneys to seek sanctions against Lindsey Halligan and urged them to consider challenging her law license. (Lawfare.)
Mark Sandy suggested legislative remedies to prevent the president “from usurping the power of the purse” in light of the Trump administration’s efforts to impound and rescind congressionally-appropriated funding. (Lawfare.)
Thomas Edsall speculated about President Trump’s potential legal liability related to his family’s cryptocurrency business deals. In the piece, Bob Bauer contended that Trump’s exposure to bribery prosecution is complicated by the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision. (NYT.)
Pending Interim Order Applications Involving the U.S. Government in the Supreme Court
Blanche v. Perlmutter: The government filed an emergency application on October 27 requesting the Supreme Court to stay a district court interlocutory injunction that temporarily reinstated Shira Perlmutter to her role as Register of Copyrights while litigation over her removal continues. Chief Justice Roberts formally set a deadline of November 10 for a response to the application. Perlmutter submitted a response on November 10. Blanche submitted a reply on November 12.
Trump v. Illinois: The government filed an emergency application on October 17 requesting the Supreme Court stay a district court order barring the deployment of the National Guard to Illinois. Justice Barrett formally set a deadline of October 20 for a response to the application. Illinois and the City of Chicago submitted a response on October 20. President Trump filed a reply on October 21. On October 29, Justice Barrett requested supplemental briefs to be filed by November 10. President Trump, as well as Illinois and the City of Chicago, both filed supplemental letter briefs on November 10 and supplemental letter replies on November 17.
Trump v. Cook: The government filed an emergency application on September 18 requesting the Supreme Court to stay a preliminary injunction issued by a district court that blocked President Trump from removing Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook. Cook filed an opposition to the request on the same day. The Chief Justice formally set a deadline of September 25 for a response to the application. Cook filed a response on September 25. On October 1, the Court deferred action on the stay application pending oral argument in January 2026 and established a supplemental briefing schedule. Additional amicus briefs were filed on October 29. The Court set argument for January 21, 2026, and both sides filed supplemental briefs on November 19.