A federal judge expressed concern on Monday over the Trump administration's persistent implementation of a broad freeze on federal spending, defying two court orders to halt it amid ongoing legal battles.
U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan noted that certain nonprofits remained hindered by the freeze and were still unable to access the funding they were promised. She highlighted that this obstacle seemed directly linked to the week-old freeze imposed by the Trump White House, despite court rulings from AliKhan and a federal judge in Rhode Island against the funding freeze during the litigation.
Legal Developments
AliKhan indicated her readiness to issue a broader injunction against the White House's spending freeze by Monday afternoon, a temporary win for nonprofits contending that the rushed actions of the Trump administration may have overstepped legal boundaries.
The Justice Department contended that AliKhan lacked the authority to prolong the halt on the spending freeze. Daniel Schwei, an attorney from the Justice Department, argued that the White House's Office of Management and Budget had already withdrawn the freeze order and federal agencies had the autonomy to make spending decisions independent of OMB's directives. Schwei asserted that it would be improper for the judge to oversee Executive Branch spending.
However, AliKhan rebuffed these arguments, pointing out that some programs seemed frozen solely due to the initial blanket freeze, without any indication of independent agency decisions.
Legal Standoff
AliKhan also dismissed DOJ's stance that the injunction from the Rhode Island judge sufficed for her to step aside.
Last week, Washington was in turmoil following OMB's memo instructing federal agencies to pause all spending except for Medicare and Social Security. After public outcry, OMB rescinded the memo. Nonetheless, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt maintained that the memo's withdrawal did not affect the spending freeze, which she asserted was still operative.
0 Comments