New Jersey, serving as co-lead of a 22-state coalition, filed a motion for summary judgment on January 22, 2026, seeking an expedited order to stop the Trump Administration from defunding the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) before March 2026. The states argue that defunding the CFPB would undermine federal and state consumer protection efforts, including states’ reliance on CFPB consumer complaint data and mortgage lending data for enforcement actions. This motion builds on a December 2025 lawsuit filed by the same coalition challenging the administration’s threats to withhold CFPB funding.
The coalition seeks an expedited court order requiring the CFPB to continue seeking funding from the Federal Reserve as provided under federal law, to prevent the agency from being defunded before March 2026 and preserve its consumer protection functions that support state enforcement efforts.
Entity
Trump Administration
Industry
OtherOfficial Press Release
https://www.njoag.gov/acting-ag-davenport-sherrill-administration-continue-new-jerseys-fight-to-preserve-consumer-financial-protection-bureau-and-protect-consumers/
2026 0122 CFPB MSJ
http://www.njoag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/2026-0122_CFPB-MSJ.pdf
New Jersey Attorney General Enforcement Page
https://www.njoag.gov/about/divisions-and-offices/division-of-consumer-affairs/
"Trump Administration"
"For Immediate Release: January 22, 2026"
"New Jersey is co-leading a motion on behalf of a coalition of states"
"Home Mortgage Disclosure Act"
"coalition of states"
"Acting Attorney General Davenport is co-leading this lawsuit with Attorneys General from New York, Oregon, Colorado, and California. Joining them in filing the suit are Attorneys General from Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Vermont, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia."
A multistate coalition co-led by New Jersey won a federal court order rejecting the Trump Administration’s decision not to request funding for the CFPB. The order struck down that decision and directed the Administration to follow the law and fund the agency; no monetary penalty or privacy violation is described.
A federal judge permanently blocked the Trump administration from penalizing states over SNAP administration and struck down guidance restricting food assistance for certain lawful permanent residents. The release does not state the date of the court’s ruling, so the event date uses the publication date as a proxy.
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison joined a coalition of 20 attorneys general in suing the Trump administration over new federal contract terms intended to purge DEI. The lawsuit alleges the agencies violated the Administrative Procedure Act by failing to provide public notice or accept comments, exceeding legal authority, and imposing vague requirements that threaten severe penalties on contractors.
A coalition of 24 states led by Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones won a lawsuit against the Trump Administration, invalidating illegal tariffs imposed under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. The U.S. Court of International Trade ruled the tariffs were unauthorized by law, as a trade deficit does not constitute the required 'large and serious balance-of-payment deficits' under the statute. The ruling prevents the administration from enforcing the 10% worldwide tariffs on most products.
Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield led a 24-state coalition in a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s tariffs imposed under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. The U.S. Court of International Trade granted summary judgment to the states, ruling the tariffs illegal as they did not meet the statutory requirement of “large and serious balance-of-payment deficits.” The court invalidated the 10 percent tariffs on most global products, barring their enforcement.
Health enforcement action: Attorney General Rayfield led a coalition of 22 states and D.C. to secure a federal court order blocking the Trump Administration from threatening to cut off Medicare and Medicaid funding to healthcare providers that offer gender-affirming care to youth with gender dysphoria. The court ruled the administration's actions unlawful, protecting access to care and upholding the right to make personal healthcare decisions.