Mar 06, 2025
By Jennifer Shutt – States ewsroom D.C. Bureau
WASHINGTON D.C. — A federal judge on Thursday blocked the Trump administration in certain states from implementing the type of freeze on trillions of dollars in grant and loan payments it tried to enact in late January — the second such ruling against the White House.
Chief Judge John J. McConnell Jr. of the U.S. District Court in Rhode Island wrote in the 45-page preliminary injunction that the proposed funding freeze undermined “the distinct constitutional roles of each branch of our government.”
“The interaction of the three co-equal branches of government is an intricate, delicate, and sophisticated balance — but it is crucial to our form of constitutional governance,” McConnell wrote. “Here, the Executive put itself above Congress. It imposed a categorical mandate on the spending of congressionally appropriated and obligated funds without regard to Congress’s authority to control spending.
“Federal agencies and departments can spend, award, or suspend money based only on the power Congress has given to them — they have no other spending power.”
McConnell’s preliminary injunction applies in the 22 states and the District of Columbia, whose attorneys general filed the suit. Those include Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin.
A separate preliminary injunction, from District Judge Loren L. AliKhan of the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia, applies nationwide and was entered in late February.
Two lawsuits over memo
The two lawsuits — National Council of Nonprofits v. Office of Management and Budget and State of New York v. Trump — were both filed after the Trump administration tried to freeze trillions of dollars worth of grants and loans in late January.
The Office of Management and Budget released a two-page memo on Jan. 27 calling on federal departments and agencies to pause obligating and dispersing federal grant and loan dollars while the administration reviewed the accounts to see if they aligned with their policy goals.
The memo caused widespread confusion, including among Republicans in Congress, and led to the two lawsuits.
AliKhan entered a short-term administrative stay on Jan. 28 that was intended to prevent the freeze order from taking effect. But many departments and agencies had already halted funding, which took some time to get restarted.
The next day, the Office of Management and Budget rescinded the memo, but a social media post from White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt caused confusion about exactly what that meant.
“This is NOT a rescission of the federal funding freeze. It is simply a rescission of the OMB memo,” she wrote. “Why? To end any confusion created by the court’s injunction. The President’s EO’s on federal funding remain in full force and effect, and will be rigorously implemented.”
More court action
Leavitt’s tweet came up when AliKhan and McConnell held separate hearings on whether to issue temporary restraining orders in their respective cases. McConnell issued his on Jan. 31 and AliKhan issued hers on Feb. 3.
AliKhan held a hearing on whether to issue a preliminary injunction on Feb. 20 and McConnell held his hearing on whether to grant a preliminary injunction on Feb. 21.
AliKhan issued a preliminary injunction in that case, National Council of Nonprofits v. Office of Management and Budget, on Feb. 25.
Both cases are expected to continue in the weeks and months ahead, amid dozens of other lawsuits that have been filed against Trump administration actions.
Add comment