Trump partly defied court order on frozen funds, federal judge says; is there an Article II exception?
President Donald Trump speaks to reporters on Jan. 21. (Photo by Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)
Updated: The Trump administration failed to comply with a “clear and unambiguous" temporary restraining order lifting a freeze on federal funds, a federal judge said Monday.
In a Feb. 10 order, Chief U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell of the District of Rhode Island said 22 state attorneys general who sued presented evidence that the government continued to improperly freeze some federal funds in violation of “the plain text” of the TRO.
“The defendants now plea that they are just trying to root out fraud,” McConnell wrote. “But the freezes in effect now were a result of the broad categorical order, not a specific finding of possible fraud. The broad categorical and sweeping freeze of federal funds is, as the court found, likely unconstitutional and has caused and continues to cause irreparable harm to a vast portion of this country.”
McConnell ordered President Donald Trump and federal officials named as defendants to immediately restore frozen funds while the TRO remains in effect.
Among the publications covering McConnell’s order are Bloomberg Law, the New York Times, NPR, NBC News, the Hill and Law360.
After McConnell ruled Monday, the Trump administration filed a notice of appeal to the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at Boston. The 1st Circuit denied an administrative stay Tuesday, Reuters reports.
According to the New York Times, the case “marked a step toward what could evolve quickly into a high-stakes showdown between the executive and judicial branches.” The article noted that Vice President JD Vance said in a Feb. 9 post on X, formerly known as Twitter, that “judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power.”
Vance also commented on the issue in a 2021 podcast, according to the New York Times and NBC News. If Trump is reelected, he should “fire every single midlevel bureaucrat,” Vance said. When courts try to stop that, Vance continued, “Stand before the country like Andrew Jackson did and say: ‘The chief justice has made his ruling. Now, let him enforce it.’”
Vance told NBC News in 2022 that he is arguing that “we need to have an executive branch that’s empowered as Article II of the Constitution requires it to be.” The Article II argument surfaced in a case challenging Trump’s freeze on foreign assistance, Law.com reports.
The U.S. government argued that Trump has broad powers to conduct foreign affairs under Article II and the Foreign Service Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998.
“The president has broad authority to attend to the foreign affairs of the nation, including by determining how foreign aid funds are used,” the government brief said.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk, meanwhile, is also taking to his social media platform X to call for the impeachment of the federal judge who temporarily blocked access to the Department of the Treasury’s payment systems by his Department of Government Efficiency.
The ABA criticized efforts to “demonize the courts” in a Feb. 11 statement.
“The American Bar Association condemns recent remarks of high-ranking officials of the administration that appear to question the legitimacy of judicial review and demand impeachment of a judge merely because the court did not agree with the government’s position,” the ABA said.
“These bold assertions, designed to intimidate judges by threatening removal if they do not rule the government’s way, cross the line. They create a risk to the physical security of judges and have no place in our society. There have also been suggestions that the executive branch should consider disobeying court orders. These statements threaten the very foundation of our constitutional system,” the ABA continued.
“We recognize the potential risk to our profession, the ABA and our members, by speaking. But to stay silent is to suggest that these statements are acceptable or the new norm. They are not. And we will not be silent in the face of such words that are contrary to our constitutional system. They pose a clear and present challenge to our democracy and the separation of powers among the three independent branches. We will stand for the rule of law today as we have for nearly 150 years.”
If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal.
— JD Vance (@JDVance) February 9, 2025
If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that's also illegal.
Judges aren't allowed to control the executive's legitimate power.
A corrupt judge protecting corruption.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 9, 2025
He needs to be impeached NOW! https://t.co/zgnwZuOz2Y
See also:
Trump White House rescinds memo on freezing federal grants, reversing course
Updated Jan. 11 at 4:02 p.m. to include the statement from the ABA. Updated Jan. 12 at 9:12 a.m. to report on the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at Boston’s denial of an administrative stay.
Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.
