By Liz Nass
Gongwer News Service
Attorney General Dana Nessel joined her 19th lawsuit against the President Donald Trump and his administration on Tuesday that invokes a single provision to strip money away from states in federal funding.
Nessel joined 21 other attorneys general in questioning this one provision she says is “buried in federal regulations” to cut billions of dollars. The suit seeks to limit the administration’s use of this regulation to cut “critical funding for combating violent crime, educating students, protecting clean drinking water, conducting life-saving medical and scientific research, safeguarding public health, addressing food insecurity, and much more.”
“Whether or not Donald Trump and his administration believe it, our democracy is built on the separation of powers and the rule of law,” Nessel said in a statement. “That’s why my Democratic colleagues and I have been successful in securing 10 injunctions so far against the White House’s unlawful federal actions. The use of this mere five-word clause is just another example in a long pattern of how the Trump Administration believes they can illegally contort the law to slash billions of dollars in federal funding – funding that was authorized by Congress and that everyday Michiganders depend on. I will continue to fight, tooth and nail, against such harmful and unconstitutional policies.”
The clause in federal regulations of the Office of Management and Budget says agencies may terminate federal funding if it “no longer effectuates … agency priorities.” Nessel says those five words have led to unlawful termination being authorized by Congress.
Nessel said previous administrations didn’t shift grant funding after taking over in the middle of a funding schedule, but now, “federal agencies have shifted course and claimed unfettered authority to terminate grants on a whim and with no advance notice.”
Nessel said the lawsuit argues the regulation does not authorize, however, terminating grants based on preferences and notes the importance of clarifying the scope of this regulation.
The lawsuit is not just against OMB, but also many federal agencies using this regulation including the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Homeland Security, Justice, Labor, and State, as well as the Environmental Protection Agency, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the National Science Foundation.
The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts and is seeking a declaratory judgment that these regulations do not independently authorize these actions from the administration. In alternative, the coalition is seeking to vacate the administration’s decision to cut these grants.
Gongwer News Service
Attorney General Dana Nessel joined her 19th lawsuit against the President Donald Trump and his administration on Tuesday that invokes a single provision to strip money away from states in federal funding.
Nessel joined 21 other attorneys general in questioning this one provision she says is “buried in federal regulations” to cut billions of dollars. The suit seeks to limit the administration’s use of this regulation to cut “critical funding for combating violent crime, educating students, protecting clean drinking water, conducting life-saving medical and scientific research, safeguarding public health, addressing food insecurity, and much more.”
“Whether or not Donald Trump and his administration believe it, our democracy is built on the separation of powers and the rule of law,” Nessel said in a statement. “That’s why my Democratic colleagues and I have been successful in securing 10 injunctions so far against the White House’s unlawful federal actions. The use of this mere five-word clause is just another example in a long pattern of how the Trump Administration believes they can illegally contort the law to slash billions of dollars in federal funding – funding that was authorized by Congress and that everyday Michiganders depend on. I will continue to fight, tooth and nail, against such harmful and unconstitutional policies.”
The clause in federal regulations of the Office of Management and Budget says agencies may terminate federal funding if it “no longer effectuates … agency priorities.” Nessel says those five words have led to unlawful termination being authorized by Congress.
Nessel said previous administrations didn’t shift grant funding after taking over in the middle of a funding schedule, but now, “federal agencies have shifted course and claimed unfettered authority to terminate grants on a whim and with no advance notice.”
Nessel said the lawsuit argues the regulation does not authorize, however, terminating grants based on preferences and notes the importance of clarifying the scope of this regulation.
The lawsuit is not just against OMB, but also many federal agencies using this regulation including the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Homeland Security, Justice, Labor, and State, as well as the Environmental Protection Agency, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the National Science Foundation.
The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts and is seeking a declaratory judgment that these regulations do not independently authorize these actions from the administration. In alternative, the coalition is seeking to vacate the administration’s decision to cut these grants.
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
https://legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
