The federal judge on Tuesday blocked the Trump administration’s attempt to freeze federal funding, delivering a significant setback to President Trump’s efforts to realign government spending according to his agenda.
Court Issues Injunction Against Funding Freeze
U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan issued an order preventing the government from implementing or reinstating a directive from the White House budget office to halt federal assistance while the court reviews the matter. “In the simplest terms, the freeze was ill-conceived from the beginning,” Judge AliKhan stated, criticizing the government’s attempt to pause up to $3 trillion in federal spending practically overnight.
The judge also noted that expecting federal agencies to review every grant, loan, and fund for compliance in less than 24 hours was an “unfathomable” demand.
Nonprofits Challenge The Freeze
The freeze had been challenged by a coalition of nonprofits, including the National Council of Nonprofits, SAGE (a pro-LGBTQ advocacy group for older adults), the American Public Health Association, and the Main Street Alliance, who argued that the directive was part of a broader effort to reshape government spending. They raised concerns that the freeze could jeopardize critical programs for children, the elderly, and other vulnerable groups.
Court Emphasizes Public Interest & Impact
“These organizations had to resort to desperate measures just to stay operational,” Judge AliKhan wrote in her ruling. “The public’s interest in not having trillions of dollars arbitrarily frozen cannot be overstated.”
The Justice Department argued that the case was now moot since the memo initiating the freeze had been rescinded. However, the coalition of nonprofits insisted that the administration still intended to carry out the freeze or a similar policy, citing Trump’s ongoing efforts to realign federal spending.
Confusion Over Rescinded Memo
While the memo was rescinded, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt warned on social media that the administration’s rescission applied only to the memo, not to the entire freeze, leading to confusion about the future of the policy.
Rationale Behind Temporary Pause In Funding
The Justice Department also contended that the administration’s temporary pause in funding was a rational approach to assess its priorities, and argued that the plaintiffs’ funding was now restored, making the case speculative.
Legal Action From Democratic Attorneys General
In response to the freeze, a coalition of Democratic state attorneys general, led by New York Attorney General Letitia James, took legal action against the White House budget office. In that case, another federal judge ordered the government to unfreeze federal grants and later found that the administration had not complied with the order. The Justice Department appealed those rulings.
Additional Lawsuit Filed By Pennsylvania Governor
Additionally, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro filed his own lawsuit, claiming that federal funding to his state had still been suspended despite the court orders. He has not yet requested emergency relief.
Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International
