Federal Judge Orders Trump Administration to Keep Funding for Child Care Subsidies in 5 States
A US District Judge has ruled that the Trump administration must continue to fund child care subsidies and other social service programs in five Democratic-controlled states, at least for now. The ruling comes as a temporary restraining order issued earlier this month was set to expire.
The judge, Vernon Broderick, extended the order by two weeks after hearing arguments from both sides. He stated that he will decide later whether to keep the funding in place while the challenge to cutting it off is processed through the courts.
The US Department of Health and Human Services had informed five states - California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, and New York - that it would require them to justify spending on these programs aimed at helping low-income families. The agency also requested additional documentation, including personal information about some program beneficiaries.
The Trump administration had claimed that it was pausing the funding due to concerns over potential fraud by states granting benefits to people in the country illegally. However, Judge Broderick expressed skepticism about this claim, stating "it just seems like the cart before the horse" - essentially saying that the government is making it harder for the states to access money without any wrongdoing having been found.
The affected states argue that the move was intended to damage Trump's political adversaries, and they claim that the action is "unlawful many times over". They say that Congress created laws governing how the administration can identify noncompliance or fraud by program recipients - but the federal government has not used this process.
The states had initially received more than $10 billion annually from these programs, which support approximately 1.3 million children and families nationwide. The Child Care and Development Fund, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program, and Social Services Block Grant are among the programs impacted by the restrictions.
It is worth noting that while the Trump administration claims not to be imposing a "funding freeze", the Department of Health and Human Services announcement described as such has been perceived as such by many. Federal government lawyers argued that states could continue to receive funding if they provide requested information and demonstrate compliance with anti-fraud measures.
A US District Judge has ruled that the Trump administration must continue to fund child care subsidies and other social service programs in five Democratic-controlled states, at least for now. The ruling comes as a temporary restraining order issued earlier this month was set to expire.
The judge, Vernon Broderick, extended the order by two weeks after hearing arguments from both sides. He stated that he will decide later whether to keep the funding in place while the challenge to cutting it off is processed through the courts.
The US Department of Health and Human Services had informed five states - California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, and New York - that it would require them to justify spending on these programs aimed at helping low-income families. The agency also requested additional documentation, including personal information about some program beneficiaries.
The Trump administration had claimed that it was pausing the funding due to concerns over potential fraud by states granting benefits to people in the country illegally. However, Judge Broderick expressed skepticism about this claim, stating "it just seems like the cart before the horse" - essentially saying that the government is making it harder for the states to access money without any wrongdoing having been found.
The affected states argue that the move was intended to damage Trump's political adversaries, and they claim that the action is "unlawful many times over". They say that Congress created laws governing how the administration can identify noncompliance or fraud by program recipients - but the federal government has not used this process.
The states had initially received more than $10 billion annually from these programs, which support approximately 1.3 million children and families nationwide. The Child Care and Development Fund, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program, and Social Services Block Grant are among the programs impacted by the restrictions.
It is worth noting that while the Trump administration claims not to be imposing a "funding freeze", the Department of Health and Human Services announcement described as such has been perceived as such by many. Federal government lawyers argued that states could continue to receive funding if they provide requested information and demonstrate compliance with anti-fraud measures.
can't believe the trump admin is trying to cut off funding for child care subsidies in these 5 states... like, what's wrong with them? 
the judge basically called out their bluff and said no way, you can't just cut off funding without doing your homework first. 
and btw, who does the trumps think they are trying to target specific states that are, like, super blue? 
it's just soooo not cool... anyway, glad the judge is keeping the funding for now, fingers crossed! 
that some states are getting a break from the uncertainty 
who's in daycare 
. What if they cut off funding and he can't get the care he needs? 
I know it's not just him, though - there are so many families out there struggling to make ends meet 
. This ruling is a step in the right direction, imo 
. Maybe we can finally start talking about how to fix our country's social services instead of trying to sabotage each other's programs 
.
. I don't think it's fair to just cut off funding for programs that actually help people in need, you know? It seems like the Trump administration is trying to make it harder for states to access money without doing any actual wrongdoings 
. The states are right to argue that this is all just a political ploy to hurt their opponents 
. Let's hope he makes the right call and keeps these programs running 
.
.
I mean, if there's really that much fake ID goin' around, shouldn't they be focusin' on crackin' down on actual bad actors instead of playin' the system? 
And what's with the states havin' to justify their spending just 'cause? That sounds like a load of bureaucratic red tape... and we all know how that goes 
... like, I get their concerns about fraud but this move feels super suspicious... some states are already struggling & this could make things worse 4 families who just need a little help 
. And btw, what's with the "fraud" excuse? Are they expecting us to believe that states r just going to start giving out free stuff to ppl who dont deserve it? 
It's about time someone stood up for these programs, which honestly help so many families get back on their feet 
Anyway, this is definitely good news for families who rely on these programs. Fingers crossed the court decides to make it permanent soon 
️.
. It raises significant concerns about data privacy and the potential for undue hardship on already vulnerable populations 
. The fact that Congress has already established guidelines for identifying noncompliance or fraud without invoking such invasive measures only serves to highlight the administration's overreach 
.
. This ruling may be a temporary reprieve, but it's essential to continue pushing for a more comprehensive and equitable approach to addressing these critical issues 
Let's keep pushing for a more compassionate and equitable approach to social services - every child deserves access to quality care, regardless of their family's financial situation 
those states are gonna keep getting that cash, at least for now