Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro has taken legal action against the Trump administration over a $1.2 billion funding freeze, citing constitutional violations and administrative overreach.
At a Glance
- Governor Shapiro sues Trump administration over $1.2 billion funding freeze
- Lawsuit alleges violation of U.S. Constitution and Administrative Procedure Act
- Frozen funds impact environmental projects, infrastructure, and utility bill relief
- Administration accused of ignoring court orders to restore access to suspended funds
Shapiro Takes Legal Action Against Trump Administration
Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro has filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, challenging a $1.2 billion funding freeze that impacts statewide projects. The legal action, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on February 13, alleges that the administration’s actions violate both the U.S. Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act.
The funding freeze, initiated on January 27, affects billions in federal grants and loans previously agreed upon by Congress. Shapiro argues that the freeze jeopardizes essential environmental projects, infrastructure development, and economic improvements across the state. The lawsuit claims that federal agencies have exceeded their legal authority and ignored court orders to restore access to the suspended funds.
Impact on Pennsylvania’s Projects and Residents
The frozen funds are wanted for various environmental initiatives in Pennsylvania, including reclaiming abandoned mine land, maintaining water treatment systems, and responding to emergencies. Additionally, the funding supports efforts to plug abandoned wells and provide utility bill relief to approximately 28,000 residents.
“To protect Pennsylvania’s interests and the funding appropriated to us by Congress, I’m left with no choice but to pursue legal action to defend our Commonwealth,” Shapiro said.
The lawsuit contends that Pennsylvania agencies have been unable to access $1.2 billion in federal grants, with an additional $900 million under further review by federal agencies. This financial strain has led to debts and obligations in federally approved projects that the state cannot cover with its reserve funds.
Legal Challenges and Administration’s Response
Despite federal judges ordering the restoration of funding access, the Trump administration has not complied. The lawsuit describes the actions of the federal agencies as “flagrantly lawless” and accuses them of lacking legal authority to withhold congressionally appropriated funds over policy disagreements.
“Despite that work, and despite two temporary restraining orders requiring federal agencies to restore access to suspended funds, federal agencies continue to deny Pennsylvania agencies funding that they are entitled to receive,” the lawsuit states.
The Department of Energy claims compliance with court orders but has not confirmed the release of funds for energy efficiency upgrades. The Trump administration had initially issued a memo freezing federal grants and loans, which was later rescinded, but funds remained tied up.
Broader Implications and Future Outlook
This legal battle highlights the ongoing struggle over monetary policy and jurisdictional boundaries between state and federal entities. Shapiro’s lawsuit argues that new conditions cannot be added to federal aid after acceptance and that aid cannot be shut off without legal justification, citing a violation of the U.S. Constitution’s spending clause.
“It seems hard to believe that a judge could say, ‘We don’t want you to do that,’ so maybe we have to look at the judges,” Trump said, reflecting the administration’s stance on judicial intervention.
As the legal proceedings unfold, the outcome of this case could have significant implications for the relationship between state and federal governments, particularly in matters of funding allocation and constitutional interpretation.
