Judge says Trump cuts to anti-violence groups ‘shameful' – but can't stop them
In an opinion released on Monday, judge Amit P Mehta, who was appointed by Barack Obama in 2014, said that while the cuts were 'shameful' he does not have the authority to enact an injunction that would keep the dollars flowing. '[The] defendants' rescinding of these awards is shameful. It is likely to harm communities and individuals vulnerable to crime and violence. No federal agency, especially the Department of Justice, should conduct itself in such [a] manner,' Mehta wrote.
The lawsuit was filed on 21 May in the district court for the District of Columbia by five non-profits that'd lost millions of dollars in grant funding through the justice department's largest grant maker, the office of justice programs (OJP) the month prior. On 22 April they were among hundreds of organizations to receive notices from the justice department telling them that their grants were terminated because they no longer aligned with the agency's priorities.
Instead, the department intends to focus on 'more directly supporting certain law enforcement operations, combatting violent crime, protecting American children, and supporting American victims of trafficking and sexual assault, and better coordinating law enforcement efforts at all levels of government', the notice read.
The plaintiffs alleged that the cuts were done arbitrarily and went beyond the DOJ's authority.
'The sudden and unlawful termination of these public safety grants makes neighborhoods everywhere less safe and does irreparable harm to communities across the country,' Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, which filed the suit , said in a press release announcing the complaint's filing.
The organizations represented in the suit are: the Vera Institute of Justice's center on youth justice, Center for Children & Youth Justice, Chinese for Affirmative Action, Stop AAPI Hate, Force Detroit and Health Resources in Action.
In response, the justice department argued that the case is an example of a 'classic contractual dispute' and should have been filed in the court of federal claims. Outside of the courtroom, they also said that grants were cut because they 'failed to effectuate' and further the Trump administration's crime fighting approach.
This lawsuit is one of several filed against the Trump administration funding cuts for research and community-based services.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
15 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Top magazine editor reveals her chilling encounter with Epstein
Veteran editor Tina Brown has said she was left shaken after Jeffrey Epstein brazenly showed up inside her office without an appointment 15 years ago. Recalling her encounter with Epstein, Tina said the disgraced financier had 'cold, snake-like eyes' and warned her to halt the Daily Beast's reporting on his abuse. Tina, who launched the Daily Beast alongside media mogul Barry Diller, said the chilling face-off came in 2010, just days after the outlet ran a major investigation into Epstein's sordid history and suspicious plea deal. She told the Daily Beast Podcast: 'He said, "Just stop". And he looked at me with this kind of snake eyes, cold, and it was menacing. It was really menacing. And he pointed his finger and he said, "Just stop". 'It was a very chilling experience. I mean, it was scary, actually.' The article, headlined 'Jeffrey Epstein, Billionaire Pedophile, Goes Free,' broke new ground by revealing how victims had told investigators they were as young as 12 when Epstein trafficked them - years before prosecutors brought federal charges. Before the uninvited visit, Tina said she'd already fielded calls from both Epstein and his attorney, trying to quash the story. She refused. But when she returned from lunch one day, she found him sitting in her office - having bypassed her security. She said: 'I was stunned. I stood at the door, aghast.' 'He was a master-class con man, so maybe he was just able always to kind of get what he wanted,' she added. Tina told him the reporting wouldn't stop – and that's when he dropped the threat. 'He said, "There will be consequences if you don't stop,"' she said. 'And he just got up, and he left my room.' Tina, who had crossed paths with Epstein during New York's glitzy social heyday in the '80s and '90s, said the disgraced financier's behavior during their brief office encounter made one thing clear: intimidation was his goal. At the time of the article, Epstein had already been convicted in Florida for soliciting a minor – but had served just 13 months in a county facility under a highly controversial deal that allowed him to spend most of his days outside the jail. It would take nearly another decade before he was arrested on federal sex trafficking charges. Epstein died in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial, with the medical examiner ruling it a suicide. His death sparked widespread suspicion, political finger-pointing, and an ongoing storm of conspiracy theories. This comes just after the Justice Department announced it would not release further records related to the case, and denied the existence of a so-called 'client list' implicating powerful allies.
The Independent
17 minutes ago
- The Independent
Planned Parenthood seeks to keep Medicaid funds flowing during legal fight
Attorneys for Planned Parenthood clinics nationwide argued in federal court Friday that cutting off Medicaid funding to its abortion providers would hurt vulnerable patients who already have limited health care options. Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its affiliates in Massachusetts and Utah are fighting to block part of President Donald Trump 's tax bill they say is designed to target their clinics. The provision would end Medicaid payments to abortion providers like Planned Parenthood that primarily offer family planning services — things like contraception, abortion and pregnancy tests — and received more than $800,000 from Medicaid in 2023. Although Planned Parenthood is not specifically named in the statute, which went into effect July 4, the organization's leaders say it was meant to affect their nearly 600 centers in 48 states. However, a major medical provider in Maine and likely others have also been hit. 'It's the affiliation provision that makes this rotten to the core,' said Planned Parenthood attorney Alan Schoenfeld during Friday's hearing in Boston. The plaintiffs have filed their federal lawsuit against Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. So far, the provision has been on hold after U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston granted a temporary restraining order blocking the cuts for two weeks. That order expires July 21, when Talwani has said she will decide whether to grant a motion for a preliminary injunction against the funding cuts while the lawsuit plays out. On Friday, Talwani was particularly focused on getting a definition of what constituted an affiliation and what a Planned Parenthood health center would have to do to qualify for Medicaid funding, quizzing the federal government's attorneys if stopping abortions would be enough or if they would have to completely severe all ties. Emily Hall, an attorney representing HHS, said Friday that the federal government needs more information about Planned Parenthood's structure and time to finalize interpretations of the law. 'It depends on the nature of the corporate relationship, which I don't have,' Hall said. Fears of pending cuts to Planned Parenthood further escalated this week after a Planned Parenthood office in Ohio announced Tuesday that it was closing two health clinics — in Hamilton and Springfield, north of Cincinnati — due to state and federal cuts. 'Make no mistake: This is not a decision made by Planned Parenthood of Southwest Ohio Region,' President and CEO Nan Whaley, a one-time Democratic gubernatorial nominee, told reporters. 'We took every possible step to keep these centers open, but the devastating impact of state and federal political attacks has forced us into this very difficult position.' The centers provide preventive health care, including testing for sexually transmitted diseases, birth control and wellness exams. Medicaid is a government health care program that serves millions of low-income and disabled Americans. Nearly half of Planned Parenthood's patients rely on Medicaid.
The Independent
17 minutes ago
- The Independent
Trump's birthright citizenship order remains blocked as lawsuits march on after Supreme Court ruling
President Donald Trump 's plan to end birthright citizenship for the children of people who are in the U.S. illegally will remain blocked as an order from one judge went into effect Friday and another seemed inclined to follow suit. U.S. District Judge Joseph LaPlante in New Hampshire had paused his own decision to allow for the Trump administration to appeal, but with no appeal filed in the last week his order went into effect. 'The judge's order protects every single child whose citizenship was called into question by this illegal executive order," Cody Wofsy, the ACLU attorney representing children who would be affected by Trump's restrictions, said. 'The government has not appealed and has not sought emergency relief so this injunction is now in effect everywhere in the country.' The Trump administration could still appeal or even ask that LaPlante's order be narrowed but the effort to end birthright citizenship for children of parents who are in the U.S. illegally or temporarily can't take effect for now. The Justice Department didn't immediately return a message seeking comment. Meanwhile, a judge in Boston heard arguments from more than a dozen states who say Trump's birthright citizenship order is blatantly unconstitutional and threatens millions of dollars for essential services. The issue is expected to move quickly back to the nation's highest court. They asked U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin to consider either keeping in place the nationwide injunction he granted earlier or consider a request from the government either to narrow the scope of that order or stay it altogether. Sorokin, located in Boston, did not immediately rule but seemed inclined to side with the states. Lawyers for the government had argued Sorokin should narrow the reach of his earlier ruling granting a preliminary injunction, arguing it should be 'tailored to the States' purported financial injuries.' LaPlante issued the ruling last week p rohibiting Trump's executive order from taking effect nationwide in a new class-action lawsuit, and a Maryland-based judge said this week that she would do the same if an appeals court signed off. The justices ruled last month that lower courts generally can't issue nationwide injunctions, but it didn't rule out other court orders that could have nationwide effects, including in class-action lawsuits and those brought by states. The Supreme Court did not decide whether the underlying citizenship order is constitutional.
