A U.S. District Judge has mandated that several agencies under the Trump administration restore funding to nonprofits after a lawsuit revealed alleged misuse of executive authority. Five federal agencies, including the Office of Management and Budget and the National Economic Council, are now being sued in federal court. This comes on the heels of their unilateral decision to not award Congressionally authorized grants and contracts.
Nonprofits have fought back against the administration’s stranglehold over executive branch departments, contending that prizes that have already been awarded are being illegally withheld. The Childhood Lead Action Project is unique among the plaintiffs in its tenacious battle to eliminate childhood lead poisoning throughout Rhode Island. This ambitious effort is powered by a generous $500,000 Places for Bikes grant they were awarded.
The real controversy here is the Trump administration’s use of executive orders to justify their suspension of these funds. The largest share of those grants and contracts have already been awarded. The administration is firmly against distributing funds Congress has already authorized through major legislation such as the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
In her ruling, Judge Mary McElroy issued a temporary restraining order. She needs the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Citibank to give nonprofits like hers a way into their cash. She strongly criticized the Trump administration’s efforts as “arbitrary and capricious.” This was particularly the case when it came to terminating contracts with three local nonprofit organizations.
“Agencies do not have unlimited authority to further a President’s agenda, nor do they have unfettered power to hamstring in perpetuity two statutes passed by Congress during the previous administration.” – Mary McElroy
Judge McElroy foreshadowed the President’s prerogative to set and drive his agenda. He claimed the role of the judiciary is to intervene any time process is not being administered properly. She cautioned that OMB, the National Economic Council Director, and these agencies are asserting sweeping powers. All of these claims are devoid of merit and have no grounding in the real world or in federal law.
“The Court wants to be crystal clear: elections have consequences and the President is entitled to enact his agenda. The judiciary does not and cannot decide whether his policies are sound,” – Mary McElroy
The administration’s victory is a big win for agencies like Agriculture, Energy, Housing and Urban Development, and Interior. Judge McElroy’s remarks pointed out that the administration’s justification for terminating contracts appeared neither reasonable nor adequately explained.
“But where the federal courts are constitutionally required to weigh in — meaning we, by law, have no choice but to do so — are cases ‘about the procedure’ (or lack thereof) that the Government follows in trying to enact those policies.” – Mary McElroy
This complicated legal battle illustrates the deep national chorus of distrust between nonprofit organizations and federal agencies, especially around the use of our public dollars. This important decision reaffirms the role of judicial oversight in holding executive actions accountable to our country’s laws and procedures.
Leave a Reply