The Trump administration has made no secret that it does not like to distribute the money authorized by Congress under the Law on Reduction of Inflation and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. But on Tuesday, a federal judge issued an order “requested by agencies to return spigots funds again.”
According to President Donald Trump, federal agencies have used his executive orders to justify the holding of grants and contracts authorized in Congregation, many of which were already given. But American district judge Mary Mcelroy, who named Trump during his first term, said the administration’s actions were “neither reasonable nor reasonably explained”.
“The broad powers that (the management and budget office), the director (National Economic Council) and the five agencies claim that they are nowhere to be found in the federal law,” Mcelroy wrote.
In addition to the management and budget office and the National Economic Council, five federal agencies are being sued by as much plaintiff. For example, EPA is being indicted by the main childhood action project, which received $ 500,000 to combat the lead poisoning of children in Rhode Island. Other agencies include agriculture, energy, housing and urban development, and interior.
The case is separated from another, in which the Trump administration told Citibank to freeze hundreds of millions of dollars in funds already held in non -profit bank accounts. In that case, a federal judge said that the Trump administration – and specifically EPA – acted in a “arbitrary and capricious way” when he terminated three nonprofits. The judge issued a temporary restriction order required by EPA and Citibank to give non -profit access to funds to their accounts.
Mcelroy admitted that the Trump administration is within its rights to run the country in a certain direction, though there are borders.
“The court wants to be clear: the elections have consequences and the president has the right to approve his agenda. The judiciary does not and cannot decide whether his policies are healthy,” the judge wrote.
“But when federal courts are required by the Constitution to weigh – it means that we, by law, have no other choice, but to do so – are cases” regarding the procedure “(or lack of them) that the government follows in trying to implement those policies.”
Many companies and non -profit have opposed judicial appearances in the control of the Trump administration on departments and executive branch agencies to undo the effects of legislation adopted by Congress and signed in law under the previous administration.
Here, Mcelroy agrees with the plaintiffs. “Agencies do not have unlimited authority to further a president’s agenda, nor do they have improper power to prevent two statutes adopted by Congress during the previous administration.”
