Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Which U.S. federal district courts have the highest number of constitutional lawsuits against the Biden administration since January 20 2021?
Executive Summary
Since January 20, 2021, multiple U.S. federal district courts have hosted constitutional lawsuits challenging the Biden administration, with federal courts in Texas — particularly the Northern and Southern Districts — repeatedly highlighted for high-profile immigration and regulatory litigation brought by states such as Texas and Missouri [1] [2] [3]. Other districts, including the District of Kansas, the Eastern District of Missouri, the Western District of Louisiana, and the District of Columbia, also appear frequently in the dataset, showing that venue-shopping and state-led multistate suits have dispersed major constitutional challenges across several districts [4] [5] [6].
1. Why Texas courts keep appearing: strategy, judges, and immigration fights that shape the docket
The dataset emphasizes that Texas plaintiffs have used both the Northern and Southern Districts of Texas as repeat venues for constitutional challenges against the Biden administration, particularly on immigration policy, where judges like Drew Tipton and Matthew J. Kacsmaryk have issued consequential rulings [1]. The Northern District of Texas is identified as a “key venue” for litigation such as Texas v. Biden, which produced district-level rulings, appeals, and even Supreme Court intervention; the dispute over immigration enforcement, Migrant Protection Protocols, and deportation moratoria led to injunctions that materially affected federal policy implementation [3]. The Southern District of Texas likewise hosts multistate filings — for example State of Texas et al v. Biden heard there — underlining how state attorneys general leverage favorable districts and caselaw to seek quick and sweeping relief [2].
2. Other recurring districts: Kansas, Missouri, Louisiana and the D.C. court matter too
Beyond Texas, the analyses identify the District of Kansas, the Eastern District of Missouri, the Western District of Louisiana, and the District of Columbia as important venues for constitutional suits challenging Biden administration actions, spanning student loans, pandemic policies, and energy or environmental rules [4] [5] [6]. The presence of Nebraska v. Biden-type litigation reaching the Supreme Court and multi-issue filings in Missouri and Louisiana shows that the constitutional litigation is not confined to a single region but uses geographically diverse district courts, reflecting plaintiffs’ strategic considerations about law, precedent, and perceived judicial receptivity [4] [5]. The District of Columbia appears in at least one civil matter involving federal agencies, indicating agency-related constitutional disputes also land in the nation’s primary federal venue [6].
3. What the sources claim about volume versus prominence: many suits, concentrated impact
The available material differentiates between the sheer number of filings and the prominence or impact of specific cases. Reports stress that Texas litigation has been particularly disruptive, producing injunctions and stays that altered federal policy timetables [1]. Other district courts may host many constitutional claims across different subjects but without the same pattern of sweeping preliminary relief; conversely, a single high-profile suit (for example, student loan or immigration challenges) can produce outsized effects even if fewer suits are filed in that district [4] [3]. The dataset therefore supports a conclusion that Texas districts are disproportionately prominent in consequential litigation, while multiple other districts register substantial numbers of distinct constitutional claims.
4. Limits of the dataset: what we cannot conclude without comprehensive docket counts
The provided analyses underscore important findings but fall short of offering a complete empirical count of constitutional lawsuits by district; none of the summaries supplies comprehensive, cross-district docket tallies needed to state definitively which district has the highest absolute number of filings [2] [7]. Several sources explicitly note the need for broader data collection to compare courts [2] [8]. Therefore, while the Northern and Southern Districts of Texas are repeatedly documented as prominent venues with high-impact cases, the available materials do not conclusively prove they have the single highest numeric count among all federal districts.
5. Bottom line for readers and next steps for verification
Based on the supplied material, the most defensible conclusion is that Texas federal district courts — Northern and Southern — stand out for frequency and impact of constitutional suits against the Biden administration, particularly on immigration, while courts in Kansas, Missouri, Louisiana, and the District of Columbia also host substantial litigation [1] [4] [3] [5] [6]. To move from a reasoned inference to definitive ranking of “highest number,” a systematic docket audit across all 94 federal district courts and a consistent definition of “constitutional lawsuit” would be required; the current sources recommend that additional comprehensive counts and updated trackers be consulted to confirm absolute numbers [2] [8].