'Disdain for the government': Trump admin moves to disqualify judge in golf course case by accusing her of 'histrionics' and 'animosity'

The Trump administration has moved to disqualify the judge overseeing the high-profile courtroom battle over construction and tree-clearing at a public golf course in Washington, D.C.

In the case, golfers and an environmental advocacy group sued in February, alleging President Donald Trump intended to "destroy East Potomac Golf Course and to build in its place a championship-style golf course suitable for professional tournaments."

Early on, U.S. District Judge Ana C. Reyes, a Joe Biden appointee, resisted entering preliminary relief for the plaintiffs, telling the parties that she did "not want to be the overseer of Parks and Rec." But the intervening months have brought a decided change in tone and tenor.

In early October, the Department of the Interior (DOI) removed some 529 trees, earning the judge's ire, as Law&Crime previously reported. Reyes accused Department of Justice attorneys of doing "your absolute worst" and angrily criticized the government in a hearing.

"Breakneck speed to clear trees that posed no harm," the judge opined in a later written order. "The reason? Disputed. The budget? Unclear. The environmental impact? Unstudied. The urgency? None. Next steps: bulldoze hundreds more."

Earlier this week, the DOJ saw fit to heavily criticize Reyes for her decisions, legal theories and actions in the case so far.

Late Friday, the government raised the stakes.

"In light of Judge Reyes's actions here and in other high-profile litigation involving the Trump Administration, no reasonable observer could consider Judge Reyes sufficiently impartial to adjudicate this case," the 13-page motion to disqualify reads.

To hear the DOJ tell it, Reyes "has hamstrung the Government's legitimate attempts to maintain East Potomac Park from the outset."

This charge is leveled in direct response to a comment during the aforementioned hearing in which the judge said she has "given the government every single benefit of the doubt."

The government's motion simultaneously concedes a formal point and complains about the real-world upshot of an earlier decision.

"While Judge Reyes formally declined to enter any order against the Government until this week, in May she effectively granted Plaintiffs veto power over any significant maintenance at the Park," the motion goes on.

Specifically, the government takes issue with the court ordering the Trump administration to provide notice of construction equipment larger than a sedan showing up at the park where the golf course is located. Such notice was not given before the tree-removal action that precipitated the recent controversy and chagrin in the case.

The DOJ, for their part, said they were not fully apprised of the operation.

"Why don't you ask for details?" the judge yelled during the hearing.

"We did ask for details," a DOJ lawyer replied, saying they "did our best."

"No, I'm sorry. Ignorance is not an excuse here," Reyes shot back.

The motion to disqualify cites several "examples of bias" resulting from the hearing and the court's orders in the case.

"Judge Reyes has unfairly questioned Trump Administration attorneys' intelligence, allowed her disdain for the Trump Administration to influence how hearings unfold, and systematically disregarded basic separation of powers principles and Article III constraints on judicial authority," the filing continues.

The motion requests the case be transferred to a different district court judge — and then continues to criticize Reyes.

From the filing, at length:

Defendants respectfully submit that this matter should be transferred to another district court judge—one who has not demonstrated open hostility towards Defendants by prejudging the outcome of motions that are yet to be filed, summoning witnesses with no notice on federal holidays, calling witnesses to appear to testify at hearings on motions that have yet to be filed, and for violating the basic norms that a judge be a fair, neutral, and impartial arbiter applying the law to facts before the Court.

The Trump administration does not limit its criticism to Reyes' behavior in the present case alone and accuses the judge of "a pattern of animus" against the government dating back to February 2025 in a case regarding the rights of transgender service members.

"Judge Reyes's histrionics in prior hearings have clearly demonstrated she is no longer impartial," the motion goes on.

The motion criticizes the judge's "temperament" and "disdain for the government and its counsel" by likening her statements to those made by an anti-German judge during a World War I espionage case.

"She has screamed at full voice, suggested that the government was acting contrary to the will of Jesus, and accused counsel for the government of having done her 'absolute worst,' in addition to the statements described above," the motion continues. "The Trump Administration is entitled to a neutral forum and an adjudicator who is capable of maintaining the appearance of impartiality."

The motion also asks for the hearing audio to be released so that the public can "fully appreciate Judge Reyes's animosity."

The court quickly took stock of the motion to disqualify, ordering the plaintiffs to file a response by Sunday afternoon.