California DOJ declines records requests on Trump admin lawsuit spending

Audio By Carbonatix

(The Center Square) - The California Department of Justice declined The Center Square’s public records requests into the agency's spending on lawsuits against the Trump administration, citing attorney-client privilege and a California Supreme Court court ruling that allowed public agencies to withhold ongoing litigation costs from the public.

CADOJ cited L.A. County Board of Supervisors v. Superior Court, a 2016 case in which the California Supreme Court ruled “real-time disclosure of ongoing spending amounts can indirectly reveal clues about legal strategy, especially when multiple amounts over time are compared.” 

But government transparency experts say taxpayers have a right to know what the state is doing with their money.

“We as an organization have always thought that ruling sweeps far too broadly,” said David Snyder, executive director of the First Amendment Coalition, in an interview with The Center Square. “How much money is spent on public agency litigation is an important thing that the public should be able to know.”

The Center Square requested CADOJ disclose how much it has spent on its lawsuits against the Trump administration, including both through internal resources and outside counsel. 

CADOJ confirmed that it has spent the $5 million allocated by Gov. Gavin Newsom’s “Trump-proofing” legal fund passed in a January special legislative session and that it has records of how much it has spent.

“While the Department has records responsive to your request for how much has been spent so far on the lawsuits against the current federal administration, the Department declines to produce cost records that are privileged attorney-client communications, or reflect attorney work product, both of which are incorporated into the PRA and made exempt from disclosure by Government Code section 7927.705,” wrote Deputy Attorney General Mayara Si to The Center Square. “Disclosing cost totals could provide insight into litigation strategy or legal consultation, especially in the context of active and ongoing litigation.”

“The Department can confirm, however, that it has spent the $5 million that were allocated to the Department from the Department of Finance pursuant to SBX1-1 at the time the SB X1-1 Annual Report was finalized,” Si wrote.

CADOJ shared its first annual report on “Trump-proofing” spending published on August 1, 2025, which stated the agency had not yet contracted with any outside counsel on these federal lawsuits.

“The $5 million in SBX1-1 funds that the Department has received to date has contributed to – but in no way has been sufficient to cover – the costs of the litigation,” wrote CADOJ. “The Department has not used any SBX1-1 allocated funds to contract with outside counsel for the purposes of legal representation in connection with any federal accountability matter.”

However, with CADOJ reporting that it had not yet spent any funds on outside counsel as of July 31, it’s unclear how sharing how much it has spent on internal staff in its lawsuits against the federal government would reveal legal strategy.

“The caselaw allowing agencies to withhold attorney billing statements in some circumstances applies only to bills from outside counsel, not the time agency lawyers may have spent on any given matter,” Snyder said. “The people deserve to know how agency employees spend their time, at least at the aggregate level, because those employees’ salaries are paid by taxpayers. It’s hard to imagine how an aggregate total of time spent by agency lawyers could implicate attorney-client privilege concerns.” 

CADOJ did not respond to requests for comment.