DOJ Asks Appeals Court to End ‘Judicial Overreach’ on Trump Admin’s Funding Freezes

Secret Service police stand guard outside the White House on Jan. 28, 2023. Tasos Katopodis/Reuters

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has asked a Boston-based appeals court to place a hold on a federal judge’s decision that barred the Trump administration from freezing federal grants, loans, and other financial assistance.

In court papers submitted with the First U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday, the DOJ accused Rhode Island-based U.S. District Judge John McConnell of engaging in “intolerable judicial overreach” when he ruled that the administration had defied a prior ruling issued on Jan. 31 when it continued to withhold billions of dollars in federal funding.

“This state of affairs cannot be allowed to persist for one more day,” the DOJ lawyers wrote on Monday, asking the appeals court to issue an administrative stay to stop McConnell’s order. “A stay pending appeal is warranted.”

They further argued that the judge handed down “an extraordinary and unprecedented assertion of power by a single district court judge to superintend and control the Executive Branch’s spending of federal funds, in clear violation of the Constitution’s separation of powers” clause.

DOJ attorneys then said the appeals court, which is also based in Boston, “should stay the orders under review pending disposition of this appeal, and should enter an immediate administrative stay of the orders until the motion for stay pending appeal is resolved.”

Earlier on Monday, McConnell granted a motion for enforcement that ordered the Trump administration to restore funding that was frozen last month and to end any pause in federal funding.

“The States have presented evidence in this motion that the Defendants in some cases have continued to improperly freeze federal funds and refused to resume disbursement of appropriated federal funds,” McConnell said in his five-page order. “The broad categorical and sweeping freeze of federal funds is, as the Court found, likely unconstitutional and has caused and continues to cause irreparable harm to a vast portion of this country. These pauses in funding violate the plain text of the TRO (temporary restraining order).”

His ruling was in response to a legal challenge that was filed by Democratic attorneys general from 22 states and one from the District of Columbia, led by New York Attorney General Letitia James.

They had sued after the White House’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued a memo announcing a freeze last month that could have implicated trillions of dollars in spending. OMB withdrew that memo later that week. However, McConnell concluded that a temporary restraining order was still necessary because of evidence that a funding freeze remained in effect and that OMB’s move to pull the memo was in “name-only.”

On Friday, Democratic state attorneys general urged McConnell to enforce that order, saying the administration had taken the position that it could still withhold billions of dollars in infrastructure and environmental funding under the Inflation Reduction Act and the Infrastructure Improvement and Jobs Act.

Since taking office on Jan. 20, President Donald Trump has faced a bevy of lawsuits against his executive orders on a range of issues, including freezing government funding, terminating federal workers and the heads of government agencies, restricting National Institutes of Health research grants, limiting birthright citizenship, and more. So far, judges have issued three temporary injunctions in response to the order ending birthright citizenship for children born to illegal immigrants.

Reuters contributed to this report.