The government typically has an advantage when defending its policies against legal challenges. Courts generally defer to the executive branch’s factual declarations and formal representations about what is happening and why, rather than probing for what may actually be going on.
But the flood of litigation unleashed by the radical opening months of President Trump’s second term — combined with his habit of peddling distortions and outright lies — is testing that practice.
The tensions make explicit the obstacles facing the courts as they seek to get a grip on the truth and underscore the extent to which the president’s brazen manipulation of the facts has paved the way for him to aggressively bolster his authority and support his agenda.
Accused of defying a court order by deporting hundreds of Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador, the administration has countered that the judge had no right to issue the order — in part because, it says, the men are terrorists who have invaded the United States on behalf of Venezuela’s government.
But every element of that claim is subject to serious dispute — at least outside of a courtroom.
The administration’s efforts to shape the factual landscape on which the legal and political battle over the deportations are being fought are part of a broader pattern. It has adopted what seem to be misleading or deceptive positions in other litigation.
Even as Mr. Trump himself publicly proclaims that the billionaire Elon Musk leads the agency-dismantling initiative known as DOGE, for example, the administration has submitted court filings denying any connection. On paper, someone else is formally its director, and Mr. Musk is a White House adviser.