Federal Judge Orders Trump Administration to Keep Funding for Child Care Subsidies in Five States
A US District Judge has ruled that President Donald Trump's administration must continue to provide funding for child care subsidies and other social services programs in five Democratic-controlled states, at least for now. The ruling extends a temporary restraining order issued earlier this month that blocked the federal government from withholding money from California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, and New York.
The decision comes after the US Department of Health and Human Services sent notices to the five states requiring them to justify spending on these programs, which aim to help low-income families. The administration also requested more documentation, including personal information about beneficiaries, citing concerns about potential fraud.
However, the judge, Vernon Broderick, questioned why the administration took such action before any wrongdoing had been proven, saying "It just seems like the cart before the horse." The states argue that the move was intended to damage the Trump administration's political opponents.
The programs at stake include the Child Care and Development Fund, which supports childcare for 1.3 million children from low-income families; the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, which provides cash assistance and job training; and the Social Services Block Grant, a smaller fund that provides money for various social services.
The five states receive over $10 billion annually from these programs, with many arguing that they are essential for vulnerable families. The administration says it is working on more guidelines but has continued to provide funding to the states.
In court papers, the states argue that freezing funding without justification is "unlawful many times over" and that producing the requested data is an "impossible demand on an impossible timeline." They also claim that the administration's actions are intended to damage the states' political opponents rather than address any legitimate concerns about fraud.
The case marks another example of the Trump administration's efforts to restrict funding for social services programs in certain states, with critics arguing that this approach undermines the purpose of these initiatives and harms vulnerable populations.
A US District Judge has ruled that President Donald Trump's administration must continue to provide funding for child care subsidies and other social services programs in five Democratic-controlled states, at least for now. The ruling extends a temporary restraining order issued earlier this month that blocked the federal government from withholding money from California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, and New York.
The decision comes after the US Department of Health and Human Services sent notices to the five states requiring them to justify spending on these programs, which aim to help low-income families. The administration also requested more documentation, including personal information about beneficiaries, citing concerns about potential fraud.
However, the judge, Vernon Broderick, questioned why the administration took such action before any wrongdoing had been proven, saying "It just seems like the cart before the horse." The states argue that the move was intended to damage the Trump administration's political opponents.
The programs at stake include the Child Care and Development Fund, which supports childcare for 1.3 million children from low-income families; the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, which provides cash assistance and job training; and the Social Services Block Grant, a smaller fund that provides money for various social services.
The five states receive over $10 billion annually from these programs, with many arguing that they are essential for vulnerable families. The administration says it is working on more guidelines but has continued to provide funding to the states.
In court papers, the states argue that freezing funding without justification is "unlawful many times over" and that producing the requested data is an "impossible demand on an impossible timeline." They also claim that the administration's actions are intended to damage the states' political opponents rather than address any legitimate concerns about fraud.
The case marks another example of the Trump administration's efforts to restrict funding for social services programs in certain states, with critics arguing that this approach undermines the purpose of these initiatives and harms vulnerable populations.
This ruling is kinda cool I guess 
. If they're just trying to find some wrongdoing but its not there then its kinda unfair 
. The states need this funding to help people 
especially kids 1.3 million! 
Those programs are essential for low-income families 
and without them, things might get super tough 
. Maybe the admin should just focus on finding real problems instead of making up some reason to cut funding 
.
They're gonna send a bill asking states to pay their teachers too! 
Just kidding, but seriously, can't they just let the states do their thing without questioning them every five seconds? It's like, if I'm running a business and you keep sending me emails asking why I spent money on employees, I'd be like "Uh, thanks, boss?" 
And then there's this case about child care subsidies... who doesn't love free childcare? 
. I mean, come on, freezing funding without any justification is just basic human decency... err, I mean, basic fiscal responsibility? The states are right to call this out, and the judge got it right too. It's not like they're asking for a trillion dollars or something (although, let's be real, $10 billion is no chump change either 
). The administration's trying to play politics with people's lives, and that's just not okay. And can we please stop with the "cart before the horse" nonsense? It's like, hello, if there's a problem, address it! Don't just freeze funding without any plan in place.
"! Good job, courts! 
Like, hello! These programs are supposed to help families in need, not hurt them. And now they're saying it's okay to just take away funding without even a reason? 
to show how this might work:
And btw, $10 billion isn't chump change - that's like, small potatoes compared to what we should be investing in our communities. Anyway, kudos to the judge for calling BS on this one and keeping funding where it belongs: with the people who need it most 
The fact that they're doing this just to hurt their opponents is really messed up too. 
These programs are literally a lifeline for some families, and we should be supporting them, not restricting funding. 