Trump-Appointed Judge Urges Administration to Restore Funding Flow
The recent judicial ruling emphasizes the ongoing conflict between the Trump administration and the disbursement of funds mandated by Congress under the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. A U.S. District Judge has ordered federal agencies to resume funding that was unjustifiably withheld, highlighting the legal limits of executive power.
Judge’s Ruling on Funding Disbursement
On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Mary McElroy, appointed by Trump, criticized the administration’s attempts to withhold congressionally authorized funds. The judge stated that the actions taken by federal agencies were “neither reasonable nor reasonably explained.”
Executive Orders and Withholding of Funds
During Trump’s presidency, several federal agencies cited executive orders as justification for delaying grants and contracts that had already been approved by Congress. Judge McElroy pointed out that the broad powers claimed by the Office of Management and Budget and the National Economic Council do not align with federal law.
- The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is facing a lawsuit from the Childhood Lead Action Project, which was allocated $500,000 to combat lead poisoning in Rhode Island.
- Additional agencies involved in the lawsuit include Agriculture, Energy, Housing and Urban Development, and Interior.
Previous Legal Conflicts
This case is distinct from another legal matter where the Trump administration ordered Citibank to freeze significant funds held by nonprofits. A federal judge previously ruled that the EPA acted in an “arbitrary and capricious” manner in terminating contracts with these organizations, necessitating a temporary restraining order to restore access to their funds.
Limits of Executive Power
Judge McElroy acknowledged the administration’s right to pursue its agenda, but emphasized there are boundaries. She stated, “The judiciary does not and cannot decide whether his policies are sound.” However, she affirmed that the courts must intervene when there are procedural violations in the execution of governmental policies.
Response from Companies and Nonprofits
Numerous companies and nonprofit organizations have legally challenged the Trump administration’s overreach in managing executive branch departments. They argue that the administration’s actions effectively negate the impact of legislation passed by Congress.
In her ruling, McElroy aligned with the plaintiffs, asserting, “Agencies do not have unlimited authority to further a President’s agenda, nor do they have unfettered power to hamstring in perpetuity two statutes passed by Congress during the previous administration.”
For further information on the implications of this ruling, you can check out the official statements from the U.S. Congress or read about judicial reviews on the U.S. Courts website.
