Trump reignites legal fight over freezing billions in federal funding

(WASHINGTON) — The Trump administration is reigniting a legal fight over whether it can unilaterally freeze billions of dollars in funding in loans, grants and financial assistance.

Lawyers with the Department of Justice asked the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to stay a decision by a federal judge in Rhode Island who determined that the Trump administration likely violated the Constitution when it tried to block trillions in federal funding through a now-rescinded directive of the Office of Management and Budget.

That Rhode Island judge on Monday issued an order finding that the Trump administration, in its effort to “root out fraud,” was still cutting off funding in defiance of the court order. DOJ lawyers are now arguing that the district court is overstepping its ability to rein in the power of the president.

“This appeal arises from an extraordinary and unprecedented assertion of power by a single district court judge to superintend and control the Executive Branch’s spending of federal funds, in clear violation of the Constitution’s separation of powers,” they wrote in an emergency application to the 1st Circuit.

DOJ attorneys argued the court’s decision effectively requires the federal government to get “preclearance” from the district court for any decision relating to funding.

“It is self-evidently unworkable for the defendant agencies to be required to seek targeted relief from the district court every time they wish to withhold funds based on their own authorities,” they said in the filing.

Lawyers representing the 23 state attorneys general are aggressively pushing back on the appeal, arguing that allowing the funding freeze will irreparably harm millions of people who rely on federal money.

“This case challenges defendants’ implementation of a policy imposing across-the-board blanket freezes on payments to all recipients of federal funding associated with nearly all federal programs across the Nation, ranging from (for example) healthcare funding to education funding to critical energy and infrastructure grants — a policy that had severe and destabilizing consequences for Plaintiff States and their residents,” they said in the lawsuit.

The attorneys general also argued it is procedurally improper for the Trump administration to appeal a temporary restraining order, which generally can’t be stayed.

“If the Court were to issue an administrative stay, defendants would immediately be free to resume this sweeping and illegal policy, harming Plaintiff States and the many recipients of federal funding that reside within their jurisdictions,” they said.

The Trump administration is asking for an immediate administrative pause as well as a stay pending appeal by Friday.