A federal judge said Wednesday he plans to grant a group of Democratic attorneys general’s request to block President Trump’s freeze on federal aid, even though the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) memo was rescinded amid confusion earlier in the day.
At the end of a 35-minute virtual hearing, U.S. District Judge John McConnell signaled he agreed the OMB’s rescission of its Monday night announcement did not moot the motion filed by 22 states and Washington, D.C.
“The inappropriate effects that the state has put forward, I think the state has convinced me are going to continue. And that hasn’t changed, based on comments by the president’s press secretary,” McConnell said.
The freeze has sparked widespread confusion, even after the OMB memo was tossed earlier in the day. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt in a post to social platform X cautioned the administration was only rescinding the memo itself, not the funding freeze.
“And so I’m inclined to grant the restraining order,” McConnell said, “though I’m struggling with how it would be worded, and what effect it would have.”
The judge ordered the states to propose new language for the order before he signs off on it. Once the states file their proposal, the judge said he’ll provide the Justice Department with 24 hours to respond.
The case is one of two major lawsuits filed in response to this week’s announcement. In response to a separate challenge from private organizations, a federal judge in Washington issued an order Tuesday temporarily blocking the administration from moving forward with its plans, at least until next week.
At Wednesday’s hearing, the government contended the Democratic attorneys general’s motion was no longer a live controversy and they would need to separately file claims if they want to directly contest Trump’s flurry of executive orders.
“The motion is directed against the OMB memo,” said Justice Department attorney Daniel Schwei. “And I think it is a fundamentally different thing for them to seek relief against the potential effect of an executive order on an agency.”
The judge, who was appointed by former President Obama, at the start of the hearing signaled the motion may be moot. But ultimately, the states won him over by stressing the White House press secretary’s comments.
“The policy has not changed,” said Sarah Rice, representing Rhode Island. “And that policy, to sum it up, is freeze first, ask questions later. That’s the gravamen of our complaint, that is the source of our harm.”
The judge later expressed sympathy that the Democratic-led states and their citizens will still face irreparable harm despite the rescinded memo.
“I fear, Mr. Schwei, that that the administration is acting with a distinction without a difference,” McConnell said.
“Ms. Rice, I think, has convinced me that that while the piece of paper may not exist, that there’s sufficient evidence that the defendants collectively are acting consistent with that directive,” he continued.
Updated 4:30 p.m.
