Trump DOJ says 'ambiguous' federal court order doesn’t invalidate funding freeze

04 February

When the Trump Administration announced a federal funding freeze, Democratic attorneys general in 22 different states responded with lawsuits. Many opponents of the freeze argued that it was illegal, as the Trump Administration had no right to freeze funds that Congress had already decided on. And two different federal judges temporarily blocked the freeze, which, according to a January 29 memo from the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB), was rescinded.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, however, tweeted, "This is NOT a rescission of the federal funding freeze…It is simply a rescission of the OMB memo."

Now, according to Democracy Docket reporter Courtney Cohn, is the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is arguing that the blocking of the freeze doesn't invalidate the Trump Administration's efforts.

Cohn explains, "Trump's DOJ responded Monday, (February 3) to the order saying that since the Democratic states 'only challenged the OMB memorandum,' the Trump Administration doesn't 'read the Order to prevent the President or his advisors from communicating with federal agencies or the public about the President's priorities regarding federal spending.' The plaintiffs’ lawsuit challenged the 'OMB directive,' but their arguments addressed the action of a president freezing federal funds already allocated by Congress, alleging it violated the separation of powers outlined in the U.S. Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act."

Democratic opponents of the freeze believe that the Trump Administration is undermining Congress' funding powers.

But the Trump-era DOJ, on February 3, said that the order "contains several ambiguous terms and provisions that could be read to constitute significant intrusions on the Executive Branch’s lawful authorities and the separation of powers."

Cohn notes, "The DOJ asked the court to 'notify Defendants if they have misunderstood the intended scope of the Court's Order,' and said federal agencies that aren't defendants in the case don't have to comply with the court's halting of the federal funding freeze."

Read Democracy Docket's full article at this link.

From Your Site Articles