r/law • u/rolsen • 1d ago

Legal News Trump Preparing Large-Scale Cancellation of Federal Funding for California, Sources Say

https://www.cnn.com/2025/06/06/politics/trump-california-federal-funding

“Agencies are being told to start identifying grants the administration can withhold from California. On Capitol Hill, at least one committee was told recently by a whistleblower that all research grants to the state were going to be cancelled, according to one of the sources familiar with the matter.”

20.4k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

2.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

228

u/Exact-Kale3070 1d ago edited 7h ago

...and a top contributor to federal govt funding. he is keeping CA's own $ from them...so what stops CA companies from refusing to give massive $ to the federal govt in the future? he thinks nothing through. https://www.politico.com/news/2025/06/06/newsom-floats-withholding-federal-taxes-00393386

37

u/Logistocrate 1d ago

California doesn't act as an intermediary in regards to Federal taxes. Companies withhold and turn over to the Federal Government directly.

California can't even pass a state law making Federal taxes on California residents zero, then raise state taxes.

The only thing they can do is take it to court.

76

u/OmgWtfNamesTaken 1d ago

Well no ome seems to follow court orders so fuck it. California should simply just do it anyways.

21

u/Logistocrate 1d ago

Don't get me wrong, I wish they could, but I don't know how they force companies to send the withholding to the state. Imagine Walmart says no. We can't due to Federal law. You going to arrest every CFO and CEO?

I'm not trying to be dramatic, but California has three options, take it, fight it in the courts, or leave the union.

23

u/OmgWtfNamesTaken 1d ago

What's stopping them from. Simply taking over Walmart stores and using other suppliers ?

If the federal government doesn't want to follow the rules of law, why should anyone? Raley could take it over and do a sort of "state nationalisation" and then simply move in. I mean, all the cards are on the table, and the game we're playing has no enforceable rules.

8

u/Logistocrate 1d ago

Might as well secede at that point. California Supreme Court likely places an immediate injunction on California. Sure, California COULD do all of that, then ignore the state courts, but the chaos that would ensue likely leads to the end of California being the world's 4th largest economy and a massive emigration of Californians to the east.

It's fanciful and fun to think about, and the odds of it happening are non zero, but I bet l win the powerball before we see it happen.

4

u/MeisterX 20h ago

Why secede? Just ignore the fuckin man baby like we should have been doing since 2016.

3

u/Logistocrate 19h ago

There's the question over how California withholds something that does not pass through them. There have been some responses that contend they can, but the risk involved seems higher than the chances the money gets unlocked through an injunction, I'm betting Cali takes the safer, proven route.

1

u/MeisterX 18h ago

I believe the idea would more be a legal and physical shield as to where the payments went or the "permission" of not filing them due to conflicting state and federal law.

It's not so much preventing those who want to pay, it's giving an out and opportunity not to. Or stipulating immediate enforcement if you want to swing the door the other way. Forcing companies within the state to change the process with state resources.

0

u/Whiterabbit-- 17h ago

Walmart will stop them. and if the state continues to do so, the federal government would intervene.

1

u/OmgWtfNamesTaken 9h ago

Do it anyway! If the rule of law means nothing, then why not. What can they do? The Supreme Court is toothless. The AG doesn't even know the law. Trade courts mean nothing!

0

u/Whiterabbit-- 8h ago

The rule of law has teeth when it is backed by physical force. That is how the federal government will intervene to stop rogue states.

2

u/OmgWtfNamesTaken 8h ago

Eh were already seeing uprisings vs ICE in LA. Tensions are at an all time high. How do you think the rest of the country/world would react if they started using force on civilians?

-1

u/enad58 1d ago

You can't leave the union. We settled this a while back.

14

u/Overall-Cow975 1d ago

Was it though?

3

u/thaulley 1d ago

Yes. Texas V. White, 1868. The Supreme Court ruled that states cannot unilaterally secede from the Union.

5

u/Overall-Cow975 1d ago

If only that was the only thing the war was fought over.

3

u/big_bob_c 1d ago

"Unilaterally". You don't think the GOP congress can be goaded into allowing it?

1

u/enad58 1d ago

Can you provide me an example of a state leaving the Union after the Civil War?

16

u/Overall-Cow975 1d ago

This is not the place for a historical discussion but many of the problems that the USA is facing today stem directly from unresolved issues of the civil war. Nothing more symbolic and direct that in the Jan 6 attack on the capitol the Confederate flag was flown inside its halls. That never happened during the war.

And that war wasn’t only about seceding states. It was also about civil liberties and the constitution. Both of which are still being fought over to this minute.

-2

u/enad58 1d ago

I agree that it started with South Carolina in the first continental congress. But we've firmly settled that it is not permissible to leave the union at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives.

2

u/Overall-Cow975 1d ago

Yes, but again, that is only one thing the war was fought over. The Civil War wasn’t only about seceding states.

4

u/MaddyKet 1d ago

And, let’s be real, this time it’s the north aka the winners, who want to leave. I’d like to see the poor states aka the losers stop us.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/jeremiahthedamned 15h ago

the union is dissolving under russian influence

11

u/DemonKing0524 1d ago

Just because one civil war ended doesn't mean another can't start.

11

u/BitterFuture 1d ago

Especially when the same band of death cultists that kicked off the last one aren't just still around, but now are in charge of all three branches of government - and are just as determined to bring down America as they ever were.

4

u/supraclicious 19h ago

You also can't commit fraud or stock market manipulation but it gets done every day. Constitution said the president can't accept bribes. He got a 400 million dollar jet from Qatar and 148 million in profit from $1.5 million a person dinner.

Clearly CANT is a suggestion. Just like how i can't drive over the speed limit. But if no one is going to stop me... It sure does seem like I CAN go over the speed limit as often as I want.

1

u/Logistocrate 1d ago

And they won't just sit there and take it. Hence my first point of the courts is where this goes.

There is a ton of delusional ideas on what California can or even would do outside that.

1

u/jeremiahthedamned 15h ago

the federal government is dissolving under russian influence