U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes insisted last month that she was not interested in becoming the judicial system’s answer to a famous Dr. Seuss character. After the Trump administration removed hundreds of trees from a historic public golf course, however, the government’s conduct tested that position.

“I am not the Lorax. I do not speak for the trees. I am a judge,” Reyes said during a hearing last month. The reference was to the forest defender with a voice described as “sharpish and bossy.”

The dispute arose from a legal challenge brought by a preservationist group and two local golfers. They are seeking to block President Donald Trump from transforming the East Potomac golf course into a championship style course fashioned in the president’s image.

During a September hearing, the government said it had removed 150 trees considered dead, dying, hazardous or invasive. Reyes accepted that explanation, declined to intervene and emphasized that she did not want to become the Lorax.

Then the government abruptly razed 529 trees over a holiday weekend, according to the plaintiffs. During a fiery emergency hearing last week, Reyes repeatedly raised her voice as she confronted government lawyers about actions she believed occurred without meaningful notice.

“There is no excuse for this and you know why I’m furious right now. It was hearing from everyone on the plaintiffs’ side that this was going to happen and I said no, repeatedly, I trust the government,” Reyes said. “I trusted you all repeatedly to not do what you have done.”

The Department of Justice responded with a late Friday filing seeking her removal from the case. Its lawyers alleged that her “conduct rises to the level of deep-seated and unequivocal antipathy toward the Trump Administration.” Reyes denied the recusal request late Sunday.

Trump, meanwhile, announced Sunday on Truth Social that the course is “completely overgrown, dysfunctional, and unsafe.” He said work on a new design would begin in November and that the course would reopen in approximately 15 months.

Reyes scheduled the second portion of the emergency hearing for Monday morning, with additional testimony expected from top Department of the Interior and National Parks Service officials. She also demanded testimony from senior Department of Justice officials, including Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward, Jr.

The central question was why hundreds of trees suddenly had to come down so quickly. The government argued that the removals were based on a 2019 “Cultural Landscape Report” intended to restore the golf course to its original design.

During nearly four hours of arguments and testimony, officials could not explain the apparent urgency. Kevin Griess, superintendent for the National Mall and Memorial Parks in Washington, answered, “Not that I’m aware of,” when asked whether the tree removal was urgent.

“So the trees could be cut down tomorrow, or they could be cut down in a month from now, and from the government’s perspective, it’s basically the same,” Reyes asked. Griess replied, “From what I understand, Your Honor, yes.”

As frustration mounted, Reyes tried to bring senior officials into the hearing by phone. Frank Lands, a top NPS official, eventually joined the virtual proceeding from a parked car, helping Reyes reconstruct the brief timeline between approval and the first fallen tree.

Officials testified that the removal process unfolded across five days, seven years after the underlying plan was first outlined. Griess said he submitted the removal plan to NPS on Oct. 5 and received funding approval the following day.

The court was not notified until 4:55 p.m. on Oct. 9, the Friday before a holiday weekend. The Trump administration began cutting trees the next morning, before Reyes or the plaintiffs could respond, while what happened between Oct. 6 and Oct. 9 remained unclear.

“It is a coincidence, the Government seems to suggest, that DOI cut down hundreds of trees at the Course weeks after the President asked DOI to cut down trees at the Course, and not, say, any other time in the last seven years,” Reyes wrote. “That asks rather a lot of coincidence.”

Reyes had previously relied on an informal request for notice if more than 10 trees were going to be removed. During the emergency hearing, she said she was “regretting” her decision not to put that request into a formal written order.

On Tuesday, Reyes extended her temporary restraining order through Oct. 26 and issued a 21 page opinion. She concluded that officials raced ahead “because President Trump demands haste on his redesign,” rather than because of new enthusiasm for implementing part of the seven year old report.

The judge who said she did not speak for the trees now says the government’s assurances are no longer sufficient. With Trump pressing forward and hundreds of trees already gone, the administration has given Reyes plenty of reason to keep her judicial ax within reach.

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of LeftScoop.news. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.