A federal judge in Boston has ruled that the Trump administration cannot use an obscure clause to make billions of dollars in funding cuts. The clause, which was first introduced in 2020 and revised in 2024, allows federal agents to terminate a grant if the award ‘no longer effectuates the program goals or agency priorities.’
Background
Twenty-three states had filed a lawsuit last year accusing the administration of using the clause to make cuts to everything from crime prevention to food security to scientific research. The states argued that the language was being used to terminate grants without proper justification.
U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani granted a summary judgment preventing the administration from relying on the clause to make cuts and denied a motion by the government to dismiss the case. Talwani wrote that the administration’s interpretation of the clause ‘is not clearly supported by the text of the provision, runs counter to the regulatory scheme, receives no support in the rulemaking history, and would violate the Spending Clause’s requirement that conditions be imposed unambiguously.’
New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport praised the decision, saying it was ‘an important win for all New Jerseyans’ and confirmed that the Trump administration had ‘defied the law’ by cutting federal funding to the states.
Original reporting: 40/29 / KHBS (NW Arkansas) — read the source article.
