U.S. Court Rules Against Trump’s Federal Spending Freeze

By Nate Raymond and Jack Queen

BOSTON (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump lost a court battle regarding his administration’s attempt to freeze federal spending. An appeals court declined to pause a order compelling the government to continue funding allocation.

The U.S. Department of Justice had requested the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to stay a ruling made by a Rhode Island federal judge. The judge found that the administration had ignored a ruling made on January 31 by withholding billions in federal funding.

The Justice Department labeled Judge John McConnell’s ruling as “intolerable judicial overreach,” asserting that Trump’s authority over agency actions is well-established. However, the appellate panel expressed confidence that McConnell would clarify concerns raised by the administration, including the impact of his order on Trump’s lawful authority.

This ruling is the first setback Trump’s administration has experienced since his return to office on January 20. The 1st Circuit advised the administration it could seek another stay before the week’s end.

The three-judge panel included appointees from Democratic presidents. The White House declared it would persist in its legal battle. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt characterized the injunctions as a continuation of the justice system’s weaponization against Trump.

Simultaneously, Trump and significant figures, including Elon Musk, criticized judges blocking his agenda, asserting that judges should not undermine presidential authority. Trump asserted on social media that activism from certain judges aimed to impede government reform efforts.

Musk labeled the situation a “judicial coup” and called for the impeachment of a judge curtailing access to government systems.

These remarks raised concerns regarding Trump’s respect for court directives. The American Bar Association noted apprehensions surrounding potential assaults on the rule of law under Trump’s administration.

The lawsuit was initiated by Democratic attorneys general from 22 states and the District of Columbia following the White House’s Office of Management and Budget’s memo announcing a funding freeze touching trillions in expenditures. The OMB subsequently rescinded that memo, but McConnell insisted on a restraining order due to evidence of ongoing funding freezes.

The case illustrates ongoing legal challenges against Trump’s initiatives to reduce federal government size, expenditure cuts, and immigration reforms, consistently blocked by Democratic-led states and advocacy groups.

On Friday, Democratic attorneys general urged McConnell to uphold his funding freeze order, given the administration’s position on withholding infrastructure and environmental funds.

McConnell, appointed by Democrat Barack Obama, stated his previous order was unequivocal in prohibiting all federal funding freezes. Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha, leading the litigation, remarked that the 1st Circuit’s ruling reinforced McConnell’s order, expecting the administration’s compliance.