Records Show Democratic Attorneys General Coordinated Litigation Strategy Against Trump Months Before 2024 Election

Nearly two dozen Democratic state attorneys general signed a confidential common interest agreement as early as April 2024 to coordinate potential litigation against a future Trump administration, according to documents obtained through public records requests and reported by The Center Square.

The agreement, titled “PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL COMMON INTEREST AGREEMENT,” was first signed on April 28, 2024, by at least seven attorneys general, with District of Columbia Attorney General Brian Schwalb’s signature appearing first. Additional Democratic attorneys general joined in May and June 2024. Hawaii Attorney General Anne E. Lopez was the last known signatory on November 12, 2024—seven days after Trump won the election. In total, at least 22 Democratic attorneys general appear to have signed. No Republican attorneys general are listed as parties to the agreement.

The document enabled the signatories to share privileged materials and coordinate on “Federal Accountability issues and litigation(s) addressing such issues” while protecting confidentiality. The coordinated effort was referred to internally as the “Project for Federal Accountability.” Planning began roughly three months before President Joe Biden withdrew from the 2024 race and nearly seven months before the November election, at a time when Trump had already secured enough delegates to become the presumptive Republican nominee.

Records from the Washington State Attorney General’s Office revealed extensive internal coordination through a “Rule of Law Working Group” and the Project for Federal Accountability, including hundreds of pages of materials that remain heavily redacted. Former Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson, who later became governor, stated the day after the election that his office had been preparing potential litigation for months, including a line-by-line review of Project 2025 and tracking of Trump’s campaign statements. Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown said planning began “as soon as it was clear that Trump was going to get the nomination,” so the office would not be caught off guard.

Some states dedicated public resources to the effort. New Jersey added $1 million to its fiscal year 2026 budget for the Project for Federal Accountability to fund positions and support litigation against federal actions. California authorized $25 million through legislation for “federal accountability litigation.”

Since January 2025, Democratic state attorneys general have filed nearly 100 lawsuits against the Trump administration. California Attorney General Rob Bonta has participated in approximately 82 cases, Colorado’s Phil Weiser in at least 75, Washington’s office in about 70, and Arizona’s Kris Mayes in 46. California alone has spent an estimated $19 million on the litigation. Bonta has described the lawsuits as ensuring compliance with the law, stating that if the administration follows the law there is nothing to litigate.

Defenders of the pre-election coordination, including some Democratic officials, have compared it to Republican attorneys general’s multistate challenges during prior Democratic administrations and argued it represents prudent preparation based on experience from Trump’s first term. Critics, including former Arizona Solicitor General O.H. Skinner and others, have characterized the early organizing as evidence of a predetermined strategy to challenge Trump regardless of specific actions, noting the timing preceded both the final Democratic nominee and the election outcome.

A retired judge reviewing the concept of common interest agreements noted that parties with shared interests can legitimately coordinate confidentially, but questioned the breadth of a preemptive “Federal Accountability” framework. Public records appeals seeking fuller disclosure of participants and details remain ongoing in some states.

The documents provide a detailed look at how Democratic attorneys general structured a multistate legal network well in advance of the 2024 election and Trump’s return to office, setting the stage for the high volume of litigation that has followed.