The administration of President Donald Trump suffered another legal blow in his efforts to freeze federal funds for programs that do not align with the Republican agenda on Thursday when a second judge blocked him to implement a radical pause on spending on subsidies, loans and other financial support.
The American district judge John McConnell in Providence, Rhode Island, at the request of the 22 -states democratic prosecutors and the Columbia district, issued a court order that blocked the administration to reissue or adopt the freezing of funds announced for the first time in a Memo from the White House Budget office.
McConnell’s decision was based on a previous temporary restriction order that issued on January 31, and came after another judge in Washington on February 25 issued a preliminary judicial order that similarly blocked what she called a “badly conceived”, an abrupt pause in up to $ 3 billion in federal funds.
McConnell, appointed by Democratic President Barack Obama, said the Trump administration “had been put above Congress.”
“The categorical freezing of the Executive of appropriate and obligatory funds fundamentally undermines the constitutional roles of each branch of our government,” McConnell wrote.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comments. But the administration is expected to appeal the decision, after having without success to suspend a previous order of McConnell.
State general prosecutors demanded after the Office of Administration and Budget of the White House on January 27 issued a memorandum that ordered federal agencies to temporarily stop the expense in federal financial assistance programs.
That memorandum said that the freezing was necessary while the administration reviewed subsidies and loans to ensure that they are aligned with Trump’s executive orders, including those that end the programs of diversity, equity and inclusion and directing a break on spending on projects that seek to combat climate change.
OMB withdrew that memorandum after it became the object of two demands, one before McConnell by the State Attorney General and the other before the United States district judge, Loren Alikhan, in Washington by groups that represent non -profit organizations and small businesses.
The plaintiffs argued that the withdrawal of memory did not mean the end of the policy itself.
They pointed out a publication on social networks in X by the press secretary of the White House, Karoline Leavitt, shortly after the memorandum was withdrawn by saying: “This is not a termination of the freezing of federal funds. It is simply a termination of the OMB note.”
