A U.S. judge on Monday extended a pause on the Trump administration's plan to freeze federal loans, grants and other financial assistance, saying it may have "run roughshod" over Congress's constitutional authority over government spending.
U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan in Washington wrote that a funding freeze outlined in a memo from the White House budget office last week would be "potentially catastrophic" for organizations that rely on federal funding to carry out their missions and provide services to the public.
Her ruling, issued at the request of several advocacy groups, meant the policy is now subject to two temporary restraining orders. A federal judge in Rhode Island on Friday issued a similar order at the behest of Democratic attorneys general from 22 states and the District of Columbia.
AliKhan had last week ordered a short, administrative pause preventing the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) from moving forward with its policy while she considered whether to issue the longer temporary restraining order.
OMB in its memo had said the funding freeze was necessary to ensure funding complied with President Donald Trump's executive orders on immigration, climate change, diversity and other issues.
After first trying to clarify the funding pause, OMB then fully withdrew its memo on Wednesday. The Republican president's administration had argued the withdrawal should have had the effect of ending the lawsuit before AliKhan by a group of advocacy organizations.
But the judge, an appointee of Trump's Democratic predecessor Joe Biden, said a temporary restraining order was still necessary because funding problems remained and because there was nothing stopping OMB from reissuing the policy.
She said "furthering the president's wishes cannot be a blank check for OMB to do as it pleases." OMB's memo implicated as much as $3 trillion in financial assistance, she said, "a breathtakingly large sum of money to suspend practically overnight."
The policy appeared arbitrary and may have run afoul of Congress' authority over government spending under the U.S. Constitution, the judge said.
"It did not indicate when that freeze would end (if it was to end at all)," AliKhan wrote. "And it attempted to wrest the power of the purse away from the only branch of government entitled to wield it."
Her order will remain in place while she considers whether to issue an even longer preliminary injunction. The U.S. Department of Justice, which is defending the Trump administration's policies in court, declined to comment.
AliKhan's decision was hailed by Diane Yentel, the head of the National Council of Nonprofits, which had sued last week alongside several other groups to block what she said would have been a "reckless attempt to halt funding."
During a hearing on Monday, a lawyer for the advocacy organizations said some recipients of federal grants were still struggling to access funding despite the memo's withdrawal and the order issued on Friday by the Rhode Island judge.
"We know the policy remains in place," Kevin Friedl, a lawyer for the advocacy groups at the liberal-leaning group Democracy Forward, told AliKhan at the hearing.
A lawyer with the Justice Department, Daniel Schwei, argued Trump retained the authority to shape funding priorities under executive orders that were not challenged in the lawsuit.
"The president is allowed to direct subordinate agencies and supervise their activities," Schwei told the judge.
© Thomson Reuters 2025.
11 Comments
lincolnman
And the MAGA-losing continues...
Blacklabel
But the winning is still 20 to 1.
you are “celebrating” the continuation of wasteful spending, why is that?
Wasabi
Nothing trump try to do is working ^o^
Nibek32
The reason trump is such an ineffective potus is he has no understanding of government processes due to a lack of experience and laziness.
He's good at making big claims for headlines, but all of his policy just falls apart and never makes it across the finish line. Just like his first term.
iknowall
The Democrats are trying their hardest to slow down the Trump tsunami that is taking back the US government for the people of America.
Of course, they will fail, as they did in the election.
Blacklabel
The things Democrats are “fighting for” are so against what American people wave.
fighting to:
keep current illegals in our country
continue wasteful spending
keep allowing drugs and new illegals to come in from other countries
allow useless federal employees to stay employed without even going to office
continue sending out tax money overseas for dubious aid programs
Americans can see who Democrats fight for. Hint: it’s not Americans.
I'veSeenFootage
And what do American people wave at exactly? Passing cars? Celebrities? Their loved ones when they're leaving on a train?
bass4funk
Well, Trump has the Supreme Courts, so all is not lost, he will go through the process, so the left shouldn’t pop open a bottle of bubbly just yet.
This is exactly what the left never gets. Every single time they try to be sneaky or push a one-sided dialogue, crap happens
plasticmonkey
I doubt that Roberts, Kavanaugh, and Coney-Barrett are willing to trash the constitutional authority of Congress to be in charge of spending. It's such a no brainer.
The Constitution, separation of powers, checks and balances, democratic norms, representational governance, justice, a fair shot for all.
Here's what JD Vance thinks about separation of powers:
"And when the courts — because you will get taken to court — and when the courts stop you, stand before the country like Andrew Jackson did and say: ‘The chief justice has made his ruling. Now let him enforce it.'"
I invite anyone on this thread to read up a bit on the ideas of Curtis Yarvin, who has had an enormous influence on JD, Steve Bannon, Peter Thiel, Marc Andreesen, and other tech bros. In what's called a "Dark Enlightenment", he proposes scrapping democratic governance with governance by joint-stock corporations.
This seems to be where MAGA is headed. And it's not what the "forgotten man" had in mind when voting for Trump.
plasticmonkey
*and replacing it with
plasticmonkey
Ayn Rand would agree. Screw those starving children. We've got some winning to do.