See also: United States District Court for the District of Columbia (Jane Doe 1 et al v. Donald J. Trump et al.)

On October 30, 2017, Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly issued a preliminary injunction preventing enforcement of a proposed ban on transgender individuals from enlisting or serving in the armed forces. The order was in reference to a presidential memorandum issued on August 25, 2017, in which President Donald Trump (R) indefinitely extended a prohibition against transgender individuals from entering the military and required the military to authorize the discharge of current transgender service members by March 23, 2018. Several unidentified prospective and current servicemembers filed a motion to prevent implementation of the memorandum, arguing that the memorandum violated the due process guarantees of the Fifth Amendment. The administration moved to dismiss, arguing that, because the memorandum had not effected a change in policy and that the policy was still under review, the court lacked jurisdiction to intervene.

Holding that the plaintiffs were likely to prevail on their Fifth Amendment claims, Judge Kollar-Kotelly rejected the government's argument that the court lacked jurisdiction. Judge Kollar-Kotelly wrote,^[5]

Judge Kollar-Kotelly's order had the effect of reverting to the policy in existence prior to the issuance of the August 2017 memorandum.

See also: United States District Court for the District of Columbia (Electronic Privacy Information Center v. Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity et al., 17-1320 (CKK))

On May 11, 2017, President Donald Trump (R), by executive order, established the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity (the commission). The vice-president served as the chair of the commission and the order permitted President Trump to appoint 15 additional members. From the group of 15, the vice-president was permitted to choose a vice-chairman of the commission. Vice President Mike Pence chose Kris Kobach, Kansas Secretary of State, to serve as vice-chairman.

Pursuant to his authority as vice chairman, Kobach directed letters be sent to election officers in all 50 states and the District of Columbia requesting submission of publicly available voter roll data on three areas related to voting processes in federal elections, "including, if publicly available under the laws of [their] state, the full first and last names of all registrants, middle names or initials if available, addresses, dates of birth, political party (if recorded in your state), last four digits of social security number if available, voter history (elections voted in) from 2006 onward, active/inactive status, cancelled status, information regarding any felony convictions, information regarding voter registration in another state, information regarding military status, and overseas citizen information."^[7]

The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) filed a motion seeking a preliminary injunction and a temporary restraining order enjoining the commission from collecting voter roll data and to delete and disgorge any information data collected. A hearing on whether EPIC had standing to bring its suit was held on July 7, 2017. In an opinion by Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly issued July 24, 2017, the court held that while EPIC did have standing to seek redress of injuries allegedly suffered as a result of the commission's failure "to conduct and publish a Privacy Impact Assessment pursuant to the E-Government Act prior to initiating their collection of voter roll information," EPIC did not have standing to pursue any Constitutional or other statutory claims.

Further, the judge held that, while EPIC had standing under the E-Government Act, that law did not itself provide a means for a cause of action against the commission. Relief for an alleged E-Government Act violation must be sought pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) but, as Judge Kollar-Kotelly acknowledged, the APA was applicable only to official agency actions. Because the commission was not a federal agency and was merely an advisory panel, the APA did not apply and relief could not be sought. The judge maintained, however, that "to the extent the factual circumstances change, however—for example, if the de jure or de facto powers of the Commission expand beyond those of a purely advisory body—this determination may need to be revisited." Judge Kollar-Kotelly subsequently denied EPIC's request for a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order. EPIC President Marc Rotenberg announced that additional legal action by EPIC against the commission was expected.^[7][8]

See also: United States District Court for the District of Columbia

Judge Kollar-Kotelly presided over the Justice Department's (DOJ) challenge of the merger between US Airways and AMR, the company that owned American Airlines. The DOJ attempted to block the merger through antitrust laws, alleging that it would create price increases and cause substantial harm to consumers. The companies fought the lawsuit in court, insisting that the merger would give customers more choices in flights.^[9][10]

In recent years, the Department of Justice allowed for the mergers of Delta and Northwest Airlines, and United and Continental.^[9]

Request for stay denied
In response to the federal government shutdown of 2013, the U.S. Attorney requested a stay in litigation for the federal merger case. Judge Kollar-Kotelly denied that motion, referencing the expediency of the trial and need for a quick resolution.^[11]

Settlement reached
In November 2013, the DOJ reached a settlement with the airlines, allowing them to increase competition at various airports by selling their slots to low-cost carriers. Both parties were pleased with the solution.^[12]

Settlement approved
In April 2014, Judge Kollar-Kotelly approved the proposed merger between American Airlines and US Airways. Although the merger closed on December 9, 2013, Judge Kollar-Kotelly had to issue her final approval in order to put a stop to an antitrust lawsuit that was filed by the Department of Justice over the potential monopoly and competitive harms that had the potential to arise because of the merger. In finalizing the merger, Judge Kollar-Kotelly noted that the settlement between the DOJ and the airlines was "within the reaches of the public interest."^[13][14]

See also: United States District Court for the District of Columbia (Fouad Mahmoud Al Rabiah, et al., v. United States, et al., 1:02-cv-00082-CKK)

On September 25, 2009, Judge Kollar-Kotelly ordered that a Kuwaiti-national detainee held at Guantanamo Bay be released after being held in prison for seven years. In a declassified opinion, the judge found that federal prosecutors did not have enough evidence to keep Fouad al-Rabiah detained for a long time period.^[15] Al-Rabiah, a Kuwait Airways engineer, was captured in Afghanistan and accused of assisting al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, as well as helping Taliban fighters in Tora Bora.^[16] The detained Kuwaiti's lawyers asserted he was captured based on mistaken identity. Ultimately, Kollar-Kotelly found that he had only received two weeks of military training -- according to Kuwaiti law -- and that he had a record of charity work, with no ties to terrorism, and ordered his release.^[16] Upon the decision, the detainee's lawyer commented:

See also: United States District Court for the District of Columbia (George Lardner v. Department of Justice, 1:08-cv-01398-CKK)

On July 31, 2009, Judge Kollar-Kotelly ruled in a lawsuit that unsuccessful applicants for pardons and commutations of prison sentences must be disclosed to the public. Kollar-Kotelly also stated that no applicant for a pardon would have their chances harmed if their information was disclosed.^[17]

In the underlying case, George Lardner, a Washington Post reporter, sued the U.S. Justice Department's Office of Pardon Attorney after being denied a Freedom of Information Act request to look at who applied for pardons when George W. Bush was President.^[17]

See also: United States District Court for the District of Columbia (Council on American-Islamic Relations, v. Paul David Gaubatz, et al., cv-09-2030-CKK)

Judge Kollar-Kotelly was the presiding judge in a case brought by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) against the author of a book titled Muslim Mafia. The judge ruled against the author, who published intelligence documents he had access to while posing as an intern to gather such documents. Kollar-Korelly also ordered the author to retract other private documents that were in the book.^[18]