Federal-State Relations (US)

Subterms

    Latest story

    150 Shares67 Views

    Judge Blocks Trump’s Funding Freeze, Saying White House Put Itself ‘Above Congress’

    by

    A federal judge on Thursday continued to bar the Trump administration from withholding billions in congressionally approved funds to 22 states and the District of Columbia.The ruling, which builds on the judge’s temporary order instructing the government to keep the money flowing, sets up a broader clash between Democratic states’ attorneys general over the Trump administration’s efforts to overhaul spending to align with the president’s agenda.In an opinion handed down on Thursday morning, Judge John J. McConnell Jr. of the Federal District Court for the District of Rhode Island said the lawsuit came down to a case of executive overreach, in which top administration officials had required agencies to withhold funds authorized by Congress.A memo from the White House budget office had demanded a pause on billions in grants until the administration could determine that the funding complied with Mr. Trump’s priorities, setting off days of confusion and alarm.Judge McConnell wrote that without the injunction, “the funding that the states are due and owed creates an indefinite limbo.”“Here, the executive put itself above Congress,” he wrote. “It imposed a categorical mandate on the spending of congressionally appropriated and obligated funds without regard to Congress’s authority to control spending.”The coalition of states had sued over the suspension of funding available from several agencies, including the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which they said put them in danger.The states suing filed a second motion last week to enforce the previous order, noting “significant obstacles to accessing federal funds” even after Judge McConnell had ordered agencies to let funding flow.“Moreover, the delays prompted by FEMA’s manual review process are significant and indefinite,” the states wrote, noting that some had requested disbursements since Feb. 7.In his order on Thursday, Judge McConnell appeared to agree that the prospect of states not having access in a disaster to emergency funds paused by the Trump administration was salient.“In an evident and acute harm, with floods and fires wreaking havoc across the country, federal funding for emergency management and preparedness would be impacted,” he wrote.The judge ordered that FEMA detail steps it had taken to unfreeze funds by March 14. More

    More stories

    • 138 Shares126 Views

      in Elections

      Eric Adams Highlights Coordination With Trump’s Border Czar on Fox News

      by

      If Mayor Eric Adams of New York City wanted to dispel fears that he was beholden to the Trump administration in exchange for its maneuvering to have his criminal case dropped, his appearance on “Fox and Friends” on Friday morning seemed to have the opposite effect.In the joint appearance with President Trump’s border czar, Thomas Homan, the two described their newfound collaboration on Mr. Trump’s immigration crackdown. It led to some uncomfortable moments for Mr. Adams, a Democrat.The mayor, who is facing vigorous calls to resign, reiterated his support for working with Mr. Trump to detain and deport immigrants who are accused of crimes. Then Mr. Homan warned that he would make sure Mr. Adams complied.“If he doesn’t come through, I’ll be back in New York City, and we won’t be sitting on the couch — I’ll be in his office, up his butt, saying, ‘Where the hell is the agreement we came to?’” Mr. Homan said.Mr. Homan pressed for further cooperation from Mr. Adams and attacked Gov. Kathy Hochul, who is facing growing pressure to use her power to remove Mr. Adams from office.“Governor Hochul, she needs to be removed,” Mr. Homan said. “The one who needs to be removed is her. She supports sanctuary policies.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Bondi Announces Lawsuit Against New York Over Immigration

      by

      The attorney general, citing a law allowing New Yorkers to get a driver’s license regardless of citizenship or legal status, accused the state of “prioritizing illegal aliens over American citizens.”The Trump administration sued New York on Wednesday over its migrant policies, accusing state officials of prioritizing “illegal aliens over American citizens,” as Washington ramped up its political and legal battles with states over deportations.Attorney General Pam Bondi, in her first news conference, specifically cited New York’s “green light” law, which allows people in the state to get a driver’s license regardless of citizenship or legal status.Ms. Bondi, flanked by federal agents in raid jackets, vowed to put an end to those practices.“It stops,” Ms. Bondi said. “It stops today.”The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Albany, said New York state law was the most egregious in that it requires state authorities “to promptly tip off any illegal alien when a federal immigration agency has requested his or her information.”That, the lawsuit said, was “a frontal assault on the federal immigration laws, and the federal authorities that administer them.”Gov. Kathy Hochul’s spokesman, Avi Small, said the governor “supports deporting violent criminals who break our laws, believes that law-abiding families should not be targets and will coordinate with federal authorities who have a judicial warrant.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Hochul Halts Bill Aimed at Weakening Republican Control of House

      by

      Lawmakers were ready to pass a bill to delay a special election in New York State, but Gov. Kathy Hochul, who is in discussions with President Trump on congestion pricing, sidelined it.Gov. Kathy Hochul of New York pressured state legislative leaders on Monday to call off a vote on a bill designed to hobble Republicans’ House majority, frustrating fellow Democrats who were prepared to approve it.Neither Ms. Hochul nor leaders of the State Senate or Assembly gave any public explanation for the 11th-hour postponement. But in private conversations, the governor told them she was seeking to gain leverage in separate negotiations with President Trump over the future of the state’s new congestion pricing program, according to two officials familiar with the matter.If lawmakers had followed through, the vote would almost certainly have antagonized Mr. Trump by giving Ms. Hochul the power to delay until November a special election to fill the House seat that will be vacated by Representative Elise Stefanik, Republican of New York, Mr. Trump’s chosen U.N. ambassador, when she is confirmed by the Senate. A monthslong vacancy would deprive House Republicans of a crucial vote as they try to muscle Mr. Trump’s legislative agenda through Congress.Republicans currently control 218 seats in the House, including Ms. Stefanik’s in New York’s North Country, to the Democrats’ 215. (Republicans are expected to pick up two more seats in Florida in special elections in April.)It was not immediately clear if Mr. Trump had expressed dissatisfaction about the bill to the governor, causing her to call off the vote on the special election timing, or if Ms. Hochul was being strategic by wanting to hold a bargaining chit in their talks about congestion pricing. A spokesman for Ms. Hochul declined to comment.The governor’s intervention threw the future of the special election proposal into doubt and risked alienating a key ally: Representative Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the top House Democrat who had been aggressively lobbying the governor and state lawmakers to adopt it.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Says He Might Use U.S. Transit Agency to ‘Kill’ Congestion Pricing

      by

      In an interview with The New York Post, President Trump said that congestion pricing hurt New York City but indicated that he was still talking with Gov. Kathy Hochul.President Trump said that he was considering using the federal Department of Transportation to “kill” congestion pricing, which he claimed was deterring people from coming into Manhattan.But Mr. Trump, in a weekend interview with The New York Post, was vague about how he might try to stop the program. Options could include withholding federal transportation funds or revoking a key federal authorization to toll drivers. He also said that he was still in discussions with Gov. Kathy Hochul about the future of congestion pricing and other matters.The president also vowed in the interview to eliminate bike lanes, which are approved by the New York City Department of Transportation. “They’re dangerous. These bikes go at 20 miles an hour. They’re whacking people,” he said.Charging most vehicles a $9 fee to enter Manhattan below 60th Street is “destructive” to New York, the president said.“If I decide to do it, I will be able to kill it off in Washington through the Department of Transportation,” Mr. Trump said.Mr. Trump, a lifelong New Yorker before he moved to Florida, maintains a deep interest in the city’s affairs and complained about trash and public safety in the subway, “sidewalks in the middle of the street” and New York’s sanctuary city policies during his interview with The Post.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Administration Move to Freeze E.V. Charger Funding Confounds States

      by

      A new federal order that freezes a Biden-era program to build a national network of electric vehicle charging stations has confounded states, which had been allocated billions of dollars by Congress for the program.In interviews on Friday, some state officials said that as a result of the memo from the Trump administration, they had stopped work on the charging stations. Others said they intended to keep going.In Ohio, where Gov. Mike DeWine, a Republican, has welcomed federal money to build 19 E.V. charging stations, Breanna Badanes, a spokeswoman for the state’s Transportation Department, said Friday that “it’s safe to say we’re not sure” how or whether the state will build more.“Those stations will continue operating, but as far as what comes next, we’re in the same boat with everyone else, just trying to figure it out,” she said.The Feb. 6 memo signed by Emily Biondi, an associate administrator at the U.S. Transportation Department, said that the administration was “suspending approval of state electric vehicle infrastructure deployment plans.” The memo singled out the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure, or NEVI, program, which was authorized under the 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law.A national network of fast charging stations was part of President Joseph R. Biden’s Jr.’s effort to combat climate change by accelerating the nation’s transition to electric vehicles.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      A Constitutional Convention? Some Democrats Fear It’s Coming.

      by

      Some Republicans have said that a constitutional convention is overdue. Many Democratic-led states have rescinded their long-ago calls for one, and California will soon consider whether to do the same.As Republicans prepare to take control of Congress and the White House, among the many scenarios keeping Democrats up at night is an event that many Americans consider a historical relic: a constitutional convention.The 1787 gathering in Philadelphia to write the Constitution was the one and only time state representatives have convened to work on the document.But a simple line in the Constitution allows Congress to convene a rewrite session if two-thirds of state legislatures have called for one. The option has never been used, but most states have long-forgotten requests on the books that could be enough to trigger a new constitutional convention, some scholars and politicians believe.Some Democratic officials are more concerned than ever. In California, a Democratic state senator, Scott Wiener, will introduce legislation on Monday that would rescind the state’s seven active calls for a constitutional convention, the first such move since Donald J. Trump’s election to a second term.Mr. Wiener, who represents San Francisco, and other liberal Democrats believe there is a strong possibility of a “runaway convention.” They say that Republicans could call a convention on the premise, say, of producing an amendment requiring that the federal budget be balanced, then open the door for a free-for-all in which a multitude of other amendments are considered, including some that could restrict abortion access or civil rights.“I do not want California to inadvertently trigger a constitutional convention that ends up shredding the Constitution,” Mr. Wiener said in an interview.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      U.S. Will Allow California to Ban New Gas-Powered Cars, Officials Say

      by

      California and 11 other states want to halt the sale of new gas-powered cars by 2035. President-elect Donald Trump is expected to try to stop them.The Biden administration is expected in the coming days to grant California and 11 other states permission to ban the sale of new gasoline-powered cars by 2035, one of the most ambitious climate policies in the United States and beyond, according to three people briefed on the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it publicly.President-elect Donald J. Trump is expected to revoke permission soon after taking office, part of his pledge to scrap Biden-era climate policies. “California has imposed the most ridiculous car regulations anywhere in the world, with mandates to move to all electric cars,” Mr. Trump has said. “I will terminate that.”The state is expected to fight any revocation, setting up a consequential legal battle with the new administration.“California has long led the nation in pioneering climate policies and innovation,” said Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, earlier this year. “Those efforts will continue for years to come.”He has described the ban as the beginning of the end for the internal combustion engine.Under the 1970 Clean Air Act, the Environmental Protection Agency has for decades allowed California, which has historically had the most polluted air in the nation, to enact tougher clean air standards than those set by the federal government. Federal law also allows other states under certain circumstances to adopt California’s standards as their own.The waiver can be used to rein in toxic, smog-causing pollutants like soot, nitrogen dioxide and ozone that lead to asthma and lung disease. But California officials have also been using the waiver to curb greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide, a chief cause of global warming. Gas-powered cars and other forms of transportation are the biggest source of carbon dioxide generated by the United States.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      California Lawmakers to Propose $25 Million Fund to Litigate Trump Administration

      by

      California lawmakers will convene a special session on Monday to discuss legislation to bolster the state against potential attacks by Donald J. Trump’s administration, including a proposed fund of up to $25 million to underwrite litigation against the federal government, Gov. Gavin Newsom said.President-elect Trump and fellow Republicans signaled during the campaign that he would target signature California policies if he were to win the election, including environmental protections, safeguards for immigrants, civil rights laws and abortion access. Democratic governors across the country have expressed concerns that the second Trump administration will be better prepared and less restrained.California’s Democratic leaders, who have been working for more than a year on contingency plans in the event of a second Trump term, announced within days of the election that they would begin to meet early this month on plans to “Trump-proof” the nation’s most populous state.“We will work with the incoming administration and we want President Trump to succeed in serving all Americans,” Governor Newsom said in a statement on Monday. “But when there is overreach, when lives are threatened, when rights and freedoms are targeted, we will take action.”The fund for litigation aims to pay for legal resources in the state’s Justice Department and regulatory agencies to “challenge illegal federal actions in court and take administrative actions to reduce potential harm,” according to the governor’s office.The proposed $25 million figure is significantly less than the roughly $42 million that California spent on lawsuits against the federal government during the first Trump administration, when the state sued the government more than 120 times. The smaller number — a fraction of the state’s nearly $300 billion annual budget — is a testament to concern over the risk of a financial shortfall. California’s lawmakers struggled to close a deficit this year.The figure is also a nod to the number of fronts on which the state’s Democrats expect the Trump administration to attack California. Mr. Newsom has already vowed to provide rebates to eligible residents who buy electric vehicles if Mr. Trump ends the $7,500 federal E.V. tax credit. The governor also has floated a possible disaster assistance fund to cover victims of floods and wildfires should Mr. Trump withhold federal aid from the disaster-prone state.California also extends health insurance coverage under the state’s version of Medicaid to low-income residents regardless of immigration status, a program that the next administration has also targeted.But the fund’s size also reflects the state’s success during and after Mr. Trump’s first term in protecting Californians against efforts to weaken state regulations, and the likelihood that Democratic states will work together to challenge Mr. Trump. More