A federal judge on Friday temporarily halted the Trump administration’s effort to freeze approximately $10 billion in welfare funding designated for five Democratic-led states.
U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) preventing the administration from suspending funds that support childcare and social service programs. The order will remain in effect for two weeks while the court reviews legal arguments from both sides.
Funding Freeze Targets Five States
Earlier this week, the Trump administration notified California, Colorado, Illinois, New York, and Minnesota that portions of their federal welfare funding would be withheld. The notices, sent by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), informed state officials that the freeze would take effect by January 20.
California stands to lose the largest share, accounting for roughly half of the total funding affected.
States File Emergency Lawsuit
In response, California Attorney General Rob Bonta, joined by attorneys general from the other four states, filed a lawsuit challenging the legality of the funding freeze. The states requested emergency court intervention, arguing that the cuts would cause immediate harm to vulnerable populations and disrupt essential services.
Judge Subramanian granted the emergency request, ordering that funds from three major programs continue to be distributed:
- Child Care and Development Fund
- Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
- Social Services Block Grants
Judge Allows Time for Further Legal Review
In his ruling, Judge Subramanian stated that the temporary order is intended to preserve the status quo while both parties submit more detailed legal briefs. The court will later decide whether the funding freeze can proceed or should be permanently blocked.
The restraining order is set to expire in two weeks unless extended by the court.
Administration Cites Fraud Concerns
The Trump administration has argued that the funding freeze is justified by concerns over alleged fraud and mismanagement within state-run welfare programs. Officials have also requested extensive documentation from the affected states regarding how the programs are administered.
State officials, however, dispute the administration’s claims, arguing that no evidence has been provided to substantiate allegations of widespread fraud or waste.
What Comes Next
As the legal battle unfolds, welfare funding for the five states will continue to flow temporarily. The court’s next decision could have significant implications for federal oversight of social service programs and the balance of power between states and the federal government.
About The Author
