Trump administration seeks to remove Judge Ana Reyes from East Potomac Golf Links litigation, citing “open hostility,” report says

The Trump administration is asking a federal court to disqualify U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes from a legal battle involving East Potomac Golf Links, a matter that has become part of a broader court fight over major Trump administration actions, according to a report by The Hill published October 23, 2026.

In filings referenced by the newspaper, the administration argues that Reyes has shown “open hostility,” and it seeks her removal from the case involving the golf course, which has drawn scrutiny from the executive branch and interest groups in recent years. The Hill’s report frames the request as part of the administration’s ongoing efforts to manage or narrow the role of specific judges in high-profile lawsuits.

The dispute also includes public criticism by President Donald Trump. The Hill reported that Trump called Reyes a “crazed lunatic” on social media, and that the administration’s push to remove the judge is occurring against that backdrop of public remarks.

Reyes, who was appointed by President Joe Biden, has also been assigned, by the report’s account, nearly a dozen lawsuits challenging major Trump administration actions. The Hill said the concentration of cases in Reyes’s courtroom is one factor that has made her a focal point in the administration’s court strategy.

The specific litigation over East Potomac Golf Links centers on whether challenges to government actions in connection with the site should proceed under Reyes’s supervision. The administration’s disqualification request raises due-process questions about impartial adjudication and whether recusal is warranted when parties believe a judge has demonstrated bias or hostility, a standard that courts typically evaluate under federal recusal rules.

If the disqualification request is granted, the case would be reassigned to a different judge, changing the judicial posture and potentially affecting scheduling, briefing, and the pace at which any rulings are issued. If the request is denied, the litigation would continue under Reyes, and the administration would be left to pursue its arguments through other motions or appeals.

The Hill’s report did not indicate that a final decision had been issued at the time of publication. The next procedural step would depend on how the presiding court handles the administration’s motion, including whether the judge is asked to respond and whether the matter is decided by the same court or a separate reviewing authority.