Democratic attorneys general this week filed their 100th lawsuit against the Trump administration, part of a coordinated legal strategy. 

And the attorneys general say they are winning most of their court cases against the administration. Of the 67 cases with court rulings, the Democratic Attorneys General Association says its members have won 55 of those challenges. 

A legal challenge over environmental regulations filed this week is the AGs’ latest effort to oppose the ever-widening power of the executive branch. Since the president’s second term began last January, Democratic-led states have sued the administration on a variety of issues — ranging from the withholding of congressionally approved funds to immigration enforcement to the administration’s tariffs on foreign goods. 

Marking its 100th lawsuit, the Democratic Attorneys General Association said its members were the only group of elected leaders successfully opposing the Trump administration’s “harmful and reckless actions.”

“For too long, Trump has trampled the rule of law,” Sean Rankin, the association president, said in a news release. “And Democratic AGs have held him accountable for the harms he has done to our economy and our democracy.”

On Tuesday, a group of state and local governments sued over the administration’s repeal of limits on emissions from coal- and oil-fired power plants. The coalition argued the rollback was unlawful, saying the federal government has failed to provide a reasoned basis for it or consider the new technologies. The Trump administration has said the move was made “to ensure affordable, dependable energy for American families.” 

While it’s not unusual for states to sue the federal government, it’s one of the few paths Democrats have available to oppose President Donald Trump’s actions, with Republicans controlling the White House and both chambers of Congress.

Oregon Democratic Attorney General Dan Rayfield has been among the most prolific, suing the administration more than 50 times. Rayfield has said the suits are not political theater — they’re a vital means to checking the president’s overreach.

“People should be shocked that Oregon has filed 55 lawsuits,” he told Stateline earlier this year. “Their mind should be blown. But their mind should be equally blown at how often we’re winning these cases.”

State lawsuits represent a slice of the more than 700 lawsuits the Trump administration has faced since last January, according to a New York Times tracker. In more than 400 cases, the courts have let the administration’s policies stay in effect even as they remain in active litigation. But in more than 150 cases, the tracker shows the courts have at least partially halted administration policies. 

Stateline reporter Kevin Hardy can be reached at khardy@stateline.org. 

The Supreme Court announced Monday that it will hear a significant climate lawsuit in which oil companies are seeking to avoid being tried in state court. 

The fate of several dozen climate lawsuits brought against oil companies by state and local governments could hinge on the decision, which could determine whether the cases can be tried in state court. The suits seek to force oil companies to pay billions of dollars to help governments grapple with the costs of climate-related damages, such as natural disasters, rising sea levels and drought.

Exxon Mobil Corp. and Suncor Energy Inc., which have been sued by the city and county of Boulder, Colorado, argue the case should be dismissed because they followed national regulations when extracting and selling their products. Oil companies have claimed that federal rules around greenhouse gas emissions should preempt efforts to sue them under state laws.

Some oil companies have previously attempted to have climate cases removed to federal courts, petitions that have been denied by federal circuit courts and the Supreme Court.

But the roughly three dozen state and local governments that have sued oil companies in recent years argue that the cases belong in state court. Many of the lawsuits cite state consumer protection and fraud laws, along with evidence that the companies knew about the risks of climate change while downplaying it in public.

“We had hoped that the Supreme Court would let the decision of the lower courts rest, but we’re also confident in our case and looking forward for the chance to have it heard,” Boulder Mayor Aaron Brockett said in an interview. “I do think it’s a significant case. If the motion to dismiss is not granted, then we can get into discovery and learn exactly what Exxon and Suncor knew and when they knew it.”

The states of California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, Rhode Island and Vermont, as well as many more cities, counties and tribes, have all filed lawsuits against oil companies over climate change. 

If the Supreme Court were to rule that the Boulder case is preempted by federal law, it would be a major win for oil companies, who have long claimed that national regulations such as the Clean Air Act should supersede state laws. Such a ruling could also prevent many of the other cases from moving forward in state courts.

The case could also be complicated by the Trump administration’s recent repeal of the endangerment finding, the scientific determination that underpinned the federal government’s regulations of the greenhouse gases that cause climate change. With the feds stepping back from climate regulation, some observers believe the oil companies will have a harder time claiming that state lawsuits fall under the scope of federal policy.

In a written statement to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency prior to the repeal of the endangerment finding, a group of investor-owned electric utilities raised that concern. The Edison Electric Institute, in its letter to the agency, said that federal greenhouse gas emissions helped “protect the power sector” from legal claims by “displacing” lawsuits over companies’ role in contributing to climate change. 

“Should EPA remove its regulation of [greenhouse gases], it increases the likelihood that environmental non-governmental organizations, advocacy groups, citizen groups, and other parties will seek to bring new tort suits and other litigation to test the bounds of continued [Clean Air Act] displacement of federal common law,” the group wrote.

Editor’s Note: The story has been corrected to reflect that the Supreme Court in 2023 denied oil companies’ attempts to remove the case to federal court.

Stateline reporter Alex Brown can be reached at abrown@stateline.org. 

MyPillow founder Mike Lindell speaks to Steve Bannon during a livestream in front of his new Minnesota governor campaign bus on Dec. 11, 2025. (Photo by Michelle Griffith/Minnesota Reformer)

Mike Lindell’s memoir, “What Are the Odds? From Crack Addict to CEO,” has enjoyed a new surge of sales since he announced a run for governor late last year.

Who’s buying the book, which details his addictions and his rise to fame?

His campaign for Minnesota governor.

Lindell, the CEO of MyPillow, spent more than half the money he raised for his campaign last year buying copies of his book, according to Minnesota Campaign Finance Board data released Tuesday.

Lindell launched his campaign for Minnesota governor on Dec. 11, 2025, and in about two-and-a-half weeks raised $352,000 in individual donations.

In December, the Lindell campaign bought nearly $190,000 worth of Lindell autobiographies from MyPillow. Lindell’s campaign finance report lists the expense as “Advertising – general: Mike Lindell Books.”

Reached by phone Tuesday, Lindell said instead of typical campaign flyers, he’s giving out his book. He said MyPillow owns the books and that MyPillow is “employee-owned.”

“When we’re going around to all the places in Minnesota, other people are giving a flyer,” Lindell said. “I’m giving them the whole book so they know who I am.”

The MyPillow CEO said he isn’t sure how many copies of his book he’s given away so far, but estimated around 20,000 or 25,000. It’s unclear if the campaign paid the full price — $19.97 — or was able to use the promo code for a $10 discount.

Lindell is among 10 candidates who are seeking the Republican nomination for governor, including House Speaker Lisa Demuth; state Rep. Kristin Robbins, 2022 GOP nominee for governor Scott Jensen; and Kendall Qualls, an army veteran and health care executive.

Despite his one-time riches after developing his famous lumpy pillow, Lindell has gone broke. At his December campaign launch, a reporter asked him if he would self-fund his campaign. Lindell said no.

“Absolutely not. I can’t self-fund. I don’t have any money left,” Lindell said.

Lindell says he’s spent millions defending his false claim that the 2020 election was stolen.

In June, a federal jury found that Lindell defamed a former Dominion Voting Systems employee and was ordered to pay $2.3 million, pending appeal.

Then in September, a federal judge ruled that Lindell defamed voting machine company Smartmatic. The company is seeking $1.5 billion in damages, which will be decided by a jury.

During the defamation lawsuit brought by a Dominion Voting Systems employee over the summer, Lindell in court testimony said he was $10 million in debt.

On Tuesday, Lindell said he’s the only GOP candidate who can attract donations from across the country. Lindell said the GOP nominee needs to raise enough money to beat Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar, who launched her campaign for governor last week.

Lindell said that since the end of the year, his campaign has raised “well over a million,” though that can’t be verified until the next round of campaign finance disclosure. 

In December, Lindell’s campaign spent nearly $26,000 for an “RV Wrap,” according to the Campaign Finance Board. This presumably was to plaster his face, name and campaign website on an RV he premiered at his campaign launch.