Attorney General Dan Rayfield has emerged as a central figure in Oregon’s legal resistance to the Trump administration. Since President Trump’s second term began in January 2025, Oregon—under Rayfield’s leadership—has filed or joined a wave of lawsuits challenging federal overreach across a wide array of critical issues.

Oregon has filed at least 36 lawsuits by mid‑August 2025, with Rayfield’s office now estimated to be involved in 37 multi‑state legal actions. On average, that equates to nearly five lawsuits per month since Trump retook office on January 20, 2025. The early lawsuits include one filed as early as January 21, 2025, challenging Trump’s executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship. Oregon quickly joined a coalition of Democratic attorneys general in mounting a constitutional challenge—the clear message being that federal power cannot rewrite the Constitution. The state’s activism marks a sizable uptick compared to its first‑term resistance, when it had filed dozens of suits over four years.¹

Rayfield’s office has joined multi‑state lawsuits targeting attempts to dismantle federal agencies that support libraries, museums, minority‑owned businesses, and workers (April 4, 2025); to cut National Science Foundation programs reducing diversity in STEM and imposing caps on indirect research costs (May 28, 2025); to impose immigration‑related conditions on billions in emergency and infrastructure funding (May 13, 2025); to threaten withholding of education funds tied to diversity and inclusion policies (April 25, 2025); to cut off American Rescue Plan funds for COVID‑recovery efforts (April 10, 2025); to illegally delay or terminate NIH medical and public health research grants (April 4, 2025); to withhold VOCA funds intended for survivors of crime (August 18, 2025); to use the Congressional Review Act to undercut clean‑air vehicle standards (June 12, 2025); and to share Medicaid personal health data with ICE (July 1, 2025).²

Beyond the sheer volume of ambitious legal efforts, these lawsuits are united by a common theme: defending the constitutional integrity of federalism and protecting Oregonians from arbitrary executive action. Rayfield’s office frames each suit as a bulwark of local control—whether defending education funding, preserving public health research, safeguarding civil rights in schools, or maintaining privacy and freedom from surveillance and immigration enforcement.

For readers in southwest Washington—especially Longview, Kelso, and Cowlitz County—there’s a clear lesson in smart state-level resistance. While federal overreach parallels can’t be ignored, the tangible impact of these lawsuits reverberates even beyond Oregon’s borders. Similar fights flourish in Washington State, where agencies face analogous federal pressure—especially around climate standards, public health funds, and immigrant rights.

Solidarity across state lines can amplify outcomes. Oregon’s model shows how coordinated, legally grounded, and sustained action can push back against constitutional erosion—and in the process, protect vulnerable communities. That’s the kind of people-powered resistance the Constitution empowers.

In Oregon, Rayfield and his fellow Democratic attorneys general aren’t suing to campaign or posture—they’re litigating for democracy, defending the communities that rely on federal programs, civil rights, and scientific progress. Here, law is a shield for the rights and institutions that strengthen our society—not a weapon of political whim.

Time will tell how many more lawsuits Oregon will file before Trump’s term ends—but one thing is undeniable: Dan Rayfield has positioned Oregon at the legal forefront of resistance. That’s resistance grounded in principles, defending federalism, and rooted in community protection—not partisan politics.

Sources
– Oregon Capital Chronicle: “Oregon already sued Trump 36 times this presidency…“ (August 18, 2025) oregoncapitalchronicle.com/2025/08/18/oregon-already-sued-trump-35-times-this-presidency-and-theres-more-to-come/