A second federal judge has indefinitely blocked President Trump’s freeze on federal grants and loans, saying the White House had “put itself above Congress” and undermined democracy.
In a ruling on Thursday, U.S. District Judge John McConnell Jr. in Rhode Island prohibited the Trump administration from freezing or otherwise impeding the disbursement of appropriated federal funds to state governments.
The decision is a victory for Trump critics who say he has trampled on Congress’s authority in his effort to cut federal spending and overhaul agencies.
McConnell’s order follows a similar one issued by a different federal judge in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 25. The judge had previously issued a temporary restraining order, which on Thursday he converted into an injunction, a more permanent form of relief.
“The Executive’s categorical freeze of appropriated and obligated funds fundamentally undermines the distinct constitutional roles of each branch of our government,” McConnell wrote.
“Here, the Executive put itself above Congress,” the judge continued. “It imposed a categorical mandate on the spending of congressionally appropriated and obligated funds without regard to Congress’s authority to control spending.”
The ruling by McConnell, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, came in a lawsuit filed by 22 states with Democratic attorneys general, as well as the District of Columbia.
The lawsuit focused on a directive from the White House’s Office of Management and Budget instructing federal agencies to pause funding while it assessed whether government programs complied with executive orders issued by Trump targeting foreign aid, diversity initiatives and green-energy projects.
OMB rescinded that directive soon after the lawsuit was filed, but the states say some Congress-approved funds were still being improperly withheld. The initial rollout of the OMB policy sowed confusion among state governments, nonprofits and lawmakers who were trying to understand which programs would be halted.
In his earlier temporary restraining order, McConnell told the administration that it couldn’t “pause, freeze, impede, block, cancel, or terminate” its federal financial-assistance obligations to the states. After the judge issued that decision, the states asked him to issue a follow-up order enforcing the earlier restraining order, saying the states “continue to be denied access to federal funds.”
The initial directive noted exemptions to Medicare, Social Security benefits and assistance provided directly to individuals—but gave few other clues as to what it did and didn’t cover.
McConnell said in Thursday’s ruling that state governments face “significant disruption in health, education, and other public services” because of the funding freeze. In light of that disruption, “the Court finds that the public interest lies in maintaining the status quo and enjoining any categorical funding freeze,” the judge wrote.
McConnell is one of several trial court judges who has expressed skepticism toward Trump’s authority to unilaterally reshape the federal government and impose sweeping cost-cutting measures.
On Wednesday, a federal judge in Boston blocked the administration’s attempt to cap research costs at the National Institutes of Health, which would cut funding for medical research at universities, research hospitals and other scientific institutions.
A different federal judge on Feb. 25 dealt a setback to Trump’s effort to dismantle the U.S. Agency for International Development, ordering the Trump administration to pay contractors for roughly $2 billion in foreign aid work that has already been completed. The Supreme Court on Wednesday denied a request by the Trump administration to block the lower-court order.
The Trump administration does have some victories in early court fights. In a ruling Thursday, U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols rejected a request by USAID contractors for a restraining order that would have allowed them to resume their work. The same judge previously allowed the Trump administration to fire thousands of that agency’s employees.
More challenges are being filed as the Trump administration continues its whirlwind efforts to trim back the government. On Thursday, employment lawyers said they had filed class actions on behalf of workers across several agencies who are challenging the administration’s move to fire them while they were on probation or trial periods.
Those cases are going through the Merit Systems Protection Board, the independent agency where federal workers must bring their disputes in the first instance. Tens of thousands of employees have been fired without notice or severance, their lawyers say, in violation of laws and regulations protecting the federal workforce.
The MSPB earlier this week granted a request to temporarily reinstate probationary workers fired from the Agriculture Department.
