Latest news with #ImpoundmentAct
Hindustan Times
5 days ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Over 20 states sue Trump over $6.8 billion frozen funds for after-school, summer programmes
More than 20 states have sued US President Donald Trump over the freezing of about $6.8 billion in funding for after-school, summer programmes and other programmes. The states have argued that the Donald Trump administration has violated the US Constitution by not considering Congress's sole authority over spending. (Bloomberg) Attorney generals or governors from 24 states and the District of Columbia sued the Trump administration in federal court in Providence, Rhode Island. They argued that the US department of education and the office of management (OMB) and Budget brought chaos to schools across America by freezing funding for six programmes approved by Congress. North Carolina Attorney General Jeff Jackson told ABC News, "This is plainly against the law." He went on to explain from a legal standpoint that this is "against the Constitution, against the Impoundment Act. This is not a hard case". According to the Impoundment Control Act, 1947, Congress must note and review the executive branch withholdings of budget authority. This requires the President to report any such withholdings to Congress. ALSO READ | 20 US states sue Trump administration over sharing of medical aid data with deportation officials While the Trump administration has been going after Ivy League universities head-on, freezing millions and billions of dollars in funding, the freeze also extended to the money used to support migrant farm workers and their childrens' education, recruitment and training of teachers, English proficiency learning and academic enrichment, besides the after-school and summer programmes. The lawsuit filed against Trump said that his administration was legally required to release the funds to the states by July 1, Reuters reported. Instead, the education department notified them on June 30 that the funds would not be released under those programmes as per the deadline, citing the change in administration as its reason. At the time, an OMB spokesperson reportedly said, "ongoing programmatic review" of education funding and said initial findings showed what he termed as a misuse of grant funds to "subsidize a radical leftwing agenda." The department also raised objections to the grant money being used to support scholarship for immigrant students and LGBTQ-themed lessons. The Democratic-led states said that the freeze has resulted in cancellations of summer school and after-school programmes and the halting of other initiatives, with little time for schools to fill in the gaps in their budget. ALSO READ | Trump administration sues California over transgender athletes in schools The states have argued that the Trump administration has violated the US Constitution by not considering Congress's sole authority over spending and went against the federal administrative law by freezing funds without any logical explanation. They also said that the administration failed to abide by the Impoundment Control Act, which prevents the executive branch from single-handedly refusing to spend funds approved by Congress unless certain procedures are followed. Jackson further told ABC News, "If the courts don't act promptly, the consequences will be dire." He warned that districts face the threat of immediate harm as the school year is nearing. The North Carolina Attorney General said that the massive effect of the pause could also result in the firing of about 1,000 educators in the district. "Everybody knows when it comes to juvenile crime, you want a safe place for teenagers to be able to go, to be able to keep them out of trouble," Jackson said, adding that elimination of after-school programmes across the US has never been considered a "good idea". ALSO READ | 12 states sue Donald Trump administration in trade court to stop tariff policy Alabama State Superintendent of Education Eric Mackey said that this will affect the students with the "greatest need". He told ABC News, "The loss of funding for those rural, poor, high poverty school districts, is just going to be, you know, more fuel for the fire that makes it more difficult to educate children in those communities." Christy Gleason, executive director of Save the Children Action Network, which provides after-school programming for 41 schools in rural areas of Washington and across the South, where the school year is set to begin as soon as August, said, "Time is of the essence." "It's not too late to make a decision, so the kids who really need this still have it," she added.
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
States sue over ‘plainly against the law' Trump $6B education funding pause
About two dozen state attorneys general and Democratic governors sued the Trump administration on Monday for withholding more than $6 billion in federal funds for several education programs nationwide. "This is plainly against the law," North Carolina Attorney General Jeff Jackson told ABC News in an exclusive interview ahead of the lawsuit. The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court of Rhode Island. It includes the attorney general of the District of Columbia, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, and Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear. MORE: Trump administration pauses $6B in education programs ahead of school year "It's against the Constitution," Jackson explained, adding, "It's against the Impoundment Act. From a legal standpoint, this is not a hard case." The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 says Congress must consider and review executive branch withholdings of budget authority, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office. The law requires the president to report any withholdings promptly to Congress. Federal aid for schools is typically allocated each year on July 1, but aid was paused on June 30 in an ongoing programmatic review of education funding, according to a Department of Education memo sent to Congress obtained by ABC News. "If the courts don't act promptly, the consequences will be dire," Jackson warned, arguing that districts face immediate harm as the school year approaches. Jackson said the funding review also broke the constitutional separation of powers as the executive branch unilaterally halted congressionally authorized money for programs that serve millions of America's students. The Department of Education referred questions to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which told ABC News many of the programs "grossly misused" government funds to promote a "radical leftwing agenda." The Impoundment Control Act specifically states OMB should specify the duration of proposed partial-year deferrals. However, in a statement to ABC News, an OMB spokesman said no decisions have yet been made. Even though no funding has been cut, Jackson condemned the administration, contending the effect of the pause is going to be massive and could result in North Carolina firing about 1,000 educators. He said workforce training, teacher preparation, suicide prevention and after-school programs could all be shuttered. MORE: Schools brace for wave of parents seeking opt-outs after Supreme Court ruling "Everybody knows when it comes to juvenile crime, you want a safe place for teenagers to be able to go, to be able to keep them out of trouble," Jackson told ABC News. "Nobody thinks that eliminating after-school programs across the entire country is a good idea." The pause has so far included Title II-A grants for effective educator instruction, Title IV-B grants for after-school programming, Title IV-A grants for student support, Title III-A funding for English Language Acquisition, Title I-C funding for Migrant Education and grants for adult education, according to the department's memo to Congress. Parents groups, nonprofits, and education advocates decrying the review are also expected to mount lawsuits against the administration, according to sources familiar. "This is one of those moments where something really big and potentially really damaging could be getting ready to occur," Jackson said. "I'm going to do everything that I can to stop it," he added. "It would be great if parents across the country lent their voices to this cause. I think everybody needs to hear from them." The funding pause comes as the administration has threatened to dismantle the Department of Education, reduced nearly half the agency's staff and made cuts to grants and programs that run afoul of its priorities. Jackson and state education leaders around the country believe vulnerable students will bear the brunt of any delayed funding. Alabama, California, and Washington state's education chiefs slammed the review, saying they haven't been given a timetable on when it might be completed. OMB has not said when it will make a decision. Alabama State Superintendent of Education Eric Mackey said this will affect students with the "greatest need" as the stalled funding meets his state's ongoing educator shortage. "The loss of funding for those rural, poor, high poverty school districts, is just going to be, you know, more fuel for the fire that makes it more difficult to educate children in those communities," Mackey told ABC News. The National Education Association, the country's largest labor union that represents teachers and other education professionals, estimates Alabama could lose about $100 million if the funds aren't reinstated, Washington would be out $150 million, and more than $900 million in funding remains halted in California by the administration. "It is a huge threat to our districts, many of whom don't have the reserves to cover the balance here," California State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond told ABC News. "They built their budgets based on the expectation that federal funds would flow, as they have for many years, and so it creates threats for local districts that they may have to lay staff off. It raises threats for us as a state agency that provides technical assistance to many districts. You know, how will we continue to fund these positions?" he said. Both California and Washington state's attorneys general joined the lawsuit. The education programs likely can't withstand a review that stretches into the school year, state education leaders say. "If we don't have assurances that the money is going to be there [by September], school districts will have already started cutting programs," Washington State Superintendent of Public Instruction Chris Reykdal told ABC News. "We will start our school year under the belief that we're going to go at least a year without these funds," he said. Meanwhile, as districts in Alabama return to school within three weeks, Mackey warned some programs may be eliminated for years to come. "Let's say we get eight, nine months down the road, and we're still in this pause situation and the funds haven't come. Then, I think as we begin to budget for the 2026-2027 school year then you're going to see a lot of programs cut," Mackey said. "People, as long as they can, will hold out. But if they see that this is kind of a permanent thing, that that funding is just not going to be consistent, then they are going to have to go with the more conservative approach," he added.
5 days ago
- Politics
States sue Trump administration over $6 billion+ education funding pause
About two dozen state attorneys general and Democratic governors sued the Trump administration on Monday for withholding more than $6 billion in federal funds for several education programs nationwide. "This is plainly against the law," North Carolina Attorney General Jeff Jackson told ABC News in an exclusive interview ahead of the lawsuit. The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court of Rhode Island. It includes the attorney general of the District of Columbia, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, and Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear. "It's against the Constitution," Jackson explained, adding, "It's against the Impoundment Act. From a legal standpoint, this is not a hard case." The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 says Congress must consider and review executive branch withholdings of budget authority, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office. The law requires the president to report any withholdings promptly to Congress. Federal aid for schools is typically allocated each year on July 1, but aid was paused on June 30 in an ongoing programmatic review of education funding, according to a Department of Education memo sent to Congress obtained by ABC News. "If the courts don't act promptly, the consequences will be dire," Jackson warned, arguing that districts face immediate harm as the school year approaches. Jackson said the funding review also broke the constitutional separation of powers as the executive branch unilaterally halted congressionally authorized money for programs that serve millions of America's students. The Department of Education referred questions to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which told ABC News many of the programs "grossly misused" government funds to promote a "radical leftwing agenda." The Impoundment Control Act specifically states OMB should specify the duration of proposed partial-year deferrals. However, in a statement to ABC News, an OMB spokesman said no decisions have yet been made. Even though no funding has been cut, Jackson condemned the administration, contending the effect of the pause is going to be massive and could result in North Carolina firing about 1,000 educators. He said workforce training, teacher preparation, suicide prevention and after-school programs could all be shuttered. "Everybody knows when it comes to juvenile crime, you want a safe place for teenagers to be able to go, to be able to keep them out of trouble," Jackson told ABC News. "Nobody thinks that eliminating after-school programs across the entire country is a good idea." The pause has so far included Title II-A grants for effective educator instruction, Title IV-B grants for after-school programming, Title IV-A grants for student support, Title III-A funding for English Language Acquisition, Title I-C funding for Migrant Education and grants for adult education, according to the department's memo to Congress. Parents groups, nonprofits, and education advocates decrying the review are also expected to mount lawsuits against the administration, according to sources familiar. "This is one of those moments where something really big and potentially really damaging could be getting ready to occur," Jackson said. "I'm going to do everything that I can to stop it," he added. "It would be great if parents across the country lent their voices to this cause. I think everybody needs to hear from them." The funding pause comes as the administration has threatened to dismantle the Department of Education, reduced nearly half the agency's staff and made cuts to grants and programs that run afoul of its priorities. Jackson and state education leaders around the country believe vulnerable students will bear the brunt of any delayed funding. Alabama, California, and Washington state's education chiefs slammed the review, saying they haven't been given a timetable on when it might be completed. OMB has not said when it will make a decision. Alabama State Superintendent of Education Eric Mackey said this will affect students with the "greatest need" as the stalled funding meets his state's ongoing educator shortage. "The loss of funding for those rural, poor, high poverty school districts, is just going to be, you know, more fuel for the fire that makes it more difficult to educate children in those communities," Mackey told ABC News. The National Education Association, the country's largest labor union that represents teachers and other education professionals, estimates Alabama could lose about $100 million if the funds aren't reinstated, Washington would be out $150 million, and more than $900 million in funding remains halted in California by the administration. "It is a huge threat to our districts, many of whom don't have the reserves to cover the balance here," California State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond told ABC News. "They built their budgets based on the expectation that federal funds would flow, as they have for many years, and so it creates threats for local districts that they may have to lay staff off. It raises threats for us as a state agency that provides technical assistance to many districts. You know, how will we continue to fund these positions?" he said. Both California and Washington state's attorneys general joined the lawsuit. The education programs likely can't withstand a review that stretches into the school year, state education leaders say. "If we don't have assurances that the money is going to be there [by September], school districts will have already started cutting programs," Washington State Superintendent of Public Instruction Chris Reykdal told ABC News. "We will start our school year under the belief that we're going to go at least a year without these funds," he said. Meanwhile, as districts in Alabama return to school within three weeks, Mackey warned some programs may be eliminated for years to come. "Let's say we get eight, nine months down the road, and we're still in this pause situation and the funds haven't come. Then, I think as we begin to budget for the 2026-2027 school year then you're going to see a lot of programs cut," Mackey said. "People, as long as they can, will hold out. But if they see that this is kind of a permanent thing, that that funding is just not going to be consistent, then they are going to have to go with the more conservative approach," he added.
Washington Post
16-06-2025
- Business
- Washington Post
Watchdog: Trump administration violated Impoundment Act a second time
The Government Accountability Office said Monday that the Trump administration had violated the Impoundment Act by withholding congressionally appropriated funds to the agency responsible for supporting libraries and museums across the country. The congressional watchdog found that funds were withheld by Institute of Museum and Library Services, with the GAO calling the act a violation of a law that blocks presidents from withholding funding Congress has approved. This is the second time the GAO has told Congress that the administration unlawfully withheld funds after the administration froze funds for electric vehicles, which the White House previously denied. When asked about the latest GAO finding, the White House Office of Management and Budget referred The Washington Post to its previous response to the GAO's finding about cuts to electric vehicle funding. 'All of OMB's actions have been consistent with the President's authorities under the Constitution and laws,' OMB general counsel Mark Paoletta wrote in a letter last month to GAO. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are feuding with the administration over whether the president can cancel spending without the approval of the legislative branch. The White House has maintained that spending cuts have been in 'full compliance' with federal budget law as it reshaped federal spending through the U.S. DOGE Service changes and executive actions — including halting investments in green energy, aid to foreign nations and grants to promote diversity, equity and inclusion. When asked about investigating the Trump administration's efforts to withhold funding, GAO leader Gene L. Dodaro told senators in April that his office had opened nearly 40 separate inquiries. Staff from the Institute of Museum and Library Services were placed on administrative leave in April after Trump issued an executive order March 14 to make cuts to the agency. The American Library Association and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees sued the administration in a case that is playing out in a U.S. District Court in D.C. The Institute of Museum and Library Services, an independent government agency, was created in 1996 by an act of Congress and submitted a budget request of $280 million for fiscal 2025. New York, one of the states that opposed the executive order, received $8 million through the institute last year to fund literacy programs for children and adults, improve internet access in libraries and train library employees and pay for the salaries of two-thirds of state library staff, according to the state. GAO investigators found that the agency's spending has been slashed by more than half in the first five months of this year, according to federal spending data. The finding came from publicly available data because the investigators said the agency has been unresponsive to questions since May. Democrats have sought to stop the cuts, arguing that grants awarded through agencies such as the Institute of Museum and Library Services have benefited communities directly that might not otherwise have the resources to support their own library and museum programs. Nearly a dozen attorneys general had asked a court to halt Trump's initial executive order on the dismantling of the institute and other independent agencies, arguing that the cuts are unlawful. Jeff Stein, Carolyn Y. Johnson and Niha Masih contributed to this report.
Yahoo
09-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Opinion - We need a bipartisan Congress to check presidential power
It is no coincidence that the first article of the U.S. Constitution, the one the Framers prioritized, defines the powers of Congress, not the president. The Framers assumed Congress would play the leading role under the new constitution, as it had through the Continental Congress and the Confederation Congress. As Americans have witnessed since Jan. 20, the Framers assumed wrongly. And it is time to reassess what is best for the nation — the Framers' vision or the powers claimed by President Trump. In the 20th century and early in the 21st century, Congress ceded more power to the presidency in areas such as budget creation, diplomacy, war powers and law enforcement. Popular support accompanied those changes, particularly during the 1930s, the 1960s and the early 2000s as Americans demanded presidents 'get things done.' The first 100 days standard gained popular currency, which forced presidents to act quickly. Additionally, media coverage centered on the person of the president rather than the Congress. The latter appeared as an amorphous blob. No one could speak for the whole Congress. Disturbed by the excesses of the Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon administrations, Congress attempted to claw back some of its power through the War Powers Act, the Congressional Budget Act and the Impoundment Act. It also enacted the legislative veto that allowed Congress to override presidential actions, sometimes by doing nothing. But presidential power began to grow, particularly as divided government became more common. Presidents began to rely on executive orders to enact policy that formerly had been Congress' purview in areas such as gun control. Trump has taken presidential powers to another level entirely. He issued 26 executive orders on his first day. In his first hundred days, he signed 142. Plus, their scope is well beyond those of other presidents. They include gutting whole departments, cutting programs such as public television and public radio, ending DEI programs, authorizing massive immigrant deportation orders, and targeting individuals and corporations he felt harmed him. He has declared these orders are essential due to various national emergencies. The Framers established three branches of government to separate power, but also to check power held by each branch. Presidential power is now out of balance in relation to the other two branches. The trend has been going in that direction for many years, but now, with a president who is anxious to use such power, the effects of that imbalance are glaringly apparent. Some federal judges have checked presidential power by ruling that Trump's actions are unconstitutional or violate statutes. But the Trump administration is counting on the Supreme Court to back them up in most if not all the actions. However, the court may or may not do so, as indicated by its decision in the Kilmar Abrego Garcia case directing the administration to facilitate his return. The question of whether to abide by the Supreme Court's decisions has rarely been a live one. But today it is, making many Americans wonder whether the judiciary will be an effective check on a rapacious president. Congress could and should check the president. Some members of Congress are working on legislation to do so. Others should join. But it cannot be partisan. One such recent example of a partisan effort was the Federalist Society's Article I Project, which targeted checking Democratic presidents but has been silent about Republican ones. Members of both parties need to come together to enact legislation that limits presidential powers regardless of who is president. The legislation should not be targeted at particular policies but at reining in presidential power generally to dictate economic policy, punish opponents or ignore congressional appropriations. Congressional Republicans would benefit since Congress would be checking a Democrat in the future and not just a Republican today. Members of Congress swore to uphold the Constitution. Preserving constitutional checks and balances to maintain our democratic system is a large part of that obligation. It is time for Congress to restore the balance in the Constitution the Framers so carefully crafted for our benefit. Richard Davis is a professor emeritus of political science at BYU. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
