WASHINGTON — A coalition of 20 state attorneys general has filed two federal lawsuits over a threat to withhold transportation and disaster relief funds unless the states agree to comply with the Trump administration’s immigration policies.
One lawsuit names Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, while the other targets the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Department of Homeland Security.
The transportation suit says the administration is “trying to strong-arm” the states by cutting off funding that was “authorized by Congress, and Congress imposed no requirement for states to cooperate with immigration enforcement as a condition for receiving funding.”
It cites a letter issued by Duffy in April that said funding recipients would be required to “cooperate with Federal officials in the enforcement of … Federal immigration law.” In an accompanying press release, Duffy said recipients would also have to “end anti-American DEI [Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion] policies.”
The complaint argues that DOT is exercising powers not granted by Congress; that such withholding of funds would violate the Spending Clause of the Constitution, while assigns funding authority to Congress; and that it would constitute several violations of the Administrative Procedures Act, including one barring “arbitrary and capricious” action.
It asks that the immigration enforcement condition be ruled unconstitutional or unlawful, and for temporary and permanent injunctions against such enforcement.
“This critical funding has nothing to do with immigration, and the administration’s attempts to hold it hostage unless states agree to do the federal government’s job of civil immigration enforcement is unconstitutional and outrageous,” Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul said in a comment reported by CBS News.
California, Illinois, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Maryland are leading the transportation suit; all but Maryland are also leading the second case. Other states involved are Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin. The states all have Democratic attorneys general and governors, except for Nevada and Vermont, with Republican governors.
White House spokesman Kush Desai told the New York Times, “Americans would all be better off if these Democrat attorneys general focused on prosecuting criminals and working with the Trump administration to address the toll of gangster illegal aliens on their communities instead of playing political games.”
It’s a violation of the 10th amendment of the constitution for the federal government to fund domestic programs as those funds come with stipulations that encroach on the rights of the states and it’s citizens. States need to start funding things themselves and stop letting the federal government tax their citizens to death.
All three of you–while the two examples you’ve given are true, the difference is that this transit funding was *already appropriated and approved*. If the FedDOT and White House want to restrict *future grants* to states that are in compliance, they are well within their right to do so. However, to withhold already-appropriated funding isn’t just illegal, it’s a fool’s errand. Your taxpayer money is paying for this lawsuit that will very obviously be won by the States.
This is incorrect. Nevada raised their speed limit (Arizona, Maryland were also out of compliance) in defiance of the NMSL law and the funding for several highways approved by Congress was withheld in 1985.
So pre-approval from Congress was not an impediment to blocking funding.
Years ago they threatened to take away highway funds from the states if they didnt lower their speed limit to 55mph. So it definitely has been done before.
JOHN and THOMAS —– and those weren’t even federal law. Immigration is federal law. The cities and states are in a state of insurrection that must be punished.
The law? The 1974 Emergency Highway Energy Conservation Act that effectively prohibited speed limits higher than 55 miles per hour.
The NMSL law was repealed in 1995.
Years ago the feds threatened withhold highway funds to force states to raise the drinking age to 21,so it has been done before.