A Legal Setback for Trump’s Federal Funding Freeze
In a significant legal development, a federal judge in Rhode Island has temporarily halted former President Donald Trump’s initiative to suspend federal grants and financial assistance to states and nonprofits. This decision aligns with a lawsuit filed by a group of Democratic attorneys general challenging the legality of the freeze.
Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes, along with 22 other Democratic attorneys general, filed the lawsuit earlier this week. They contended that Trump’s attempt to block funds, which had already been allocated by Congress, was a breach of the Constitution and federal regulations.
“These are funds that were authorized by Congress, and that Donald Trump just decided to shut off,” Mayes stated. “He sort of turned the spigot off on his own. That is not the way it works in our country, so that is blatantly, flatly unconstitutional.”
Judge John McConnell echoed this sentiment, stating that the former president had exceeded his constitutional powers. “Congress has not given the Executive limitless power to broadly and indefinitely pause all funds that it has expressly directed to specific recipients and purposes and therefore the Executive’s actions violate the separation of powers,” the judge wrote in the order.
Although Trump recently withdrew the memo related to the funding halt, the judge asserted that his order remains crucial since the administration still intends to pursue the freeze. “But the evidence shows that the alleged rescission of the OMB Directive was in name-only and may have been issued simply to defeat the jurisdiction of the courts,” McConnell noted. “The substantive effect of the directive carries on.”
The temporary restraining order, which blocks the implementation of the funding freeze, will remain effective until further judicial determinations are made in the case.
—
Read More Arizona News
