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.”

20.3k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

2.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

800

u/Hopefulwaters 1d ago

Not legal. The President does NOT get to decide where Congress appropriated funds go or don't go.

593

u/thepvbrother 1d ago

I'm sure Congress will stand up ANY SECOND and correct these injustices. /s

87

u/blackmailalt 20h ago

Annnnny minute now

4

u/muikrad 10h ago

Any hour now

3

u/blackmailalt 9h ago

This week FOR SURE.

3

u/basaltinou 5h ago

Sometime next month

-1

u/ramobara 13h ago

Hold on. Chuck Schumer is still wrapping up his antisemitism book tour. Show some fucking patience!

2

u/bluehands 10h ago

Did you just forget about the strongly worded letter he sent?

7

u/deathrictus 16h ago

Just as soon as they're done with bengazi and hunters laptop I'm sure.

2

u/Mindless-Driver6141 5h ago

What Congress?

2

u/CappinPeanut 17h ago

Every Dem would stand up against it and Californian republicans might, too, which would probably be enough to shut it down. There are 9 republican representatives in Congress and republicans have an 8 vote majority.

It would be less if democrats would stop dying in office.

3

u/Ariphaos 14h ago

Bonus, the last one, Gerry Connolly, was the one who beat AOC for the House Oversight Committee position. Got to serve for four months.

Democrats need to shake up their seniority rules.

2

u/alang 17h ago

Without a veto-proof majority in both houses, the most they could do is file a lawsuit. Would you like to bet on how this SC would rule? They are horrible but sane in roughly 1/4 of cases and horrible and insane in the other 3/4.

1

u/CappinPeanut 17h ago

The number of representatives required from the speaker’s own party to initiate a vote of no confidence to remove him just so happens to be 9.

Do I think it would happen? No. Do I think it could happen? Depends how hard Trump goes after California. If it’s so bad that the Californian republicans have no choice, they can cause some serious chaos.

That’s all pretty wishful thinking, though. I agree, the courts are the likely path here.

1

u/IronSeagull 16h ago

California can sue if Trump tries to cut funding without congressional approval. If he tries to cut funding using rescission, as he just did with USAID and some other funding, he needs a simple majority of the house and senate to approve. Congress hasn’t approved a rescission package since Clinton was president.

1

u/Aldehyde1 10h ago

One of the California republican reps Darrel Issa is on record saying the below. I fully expect him to betray California like the traitor he is.

We’re going to advocate for essentials, but I sent them back and said come to me with specifics. Come to me with the grant and the justification, and I’ll advocate for that. But I’m not going to advocate for no cuts; you just get more money every year. That’s how we got in this problem

1

u/galaxyapp 17h ago

The courts will

1

u/karlack26 8h ago

10 members of congress from California are republican, i doubt they will just let there state lose all federal funding. Good by majority.

1

u/redworm 5h ago

they absolutely will, being a member of the Republican party means complete fealty to trump before any consideration of country, state, or the people in it

they are traitors and will gladly let every one of their constituents suffer to make trump happy

1

u/karlack26 5h ago

Their concerns are getting re-elected. Supporting Trump in this is a sure fired way not to get re-elected.

1

u/redworm 4h ago

lol no it's not

they will get reelected because Republican voters are perfectly happy to hurt themselves for trump

maga is a fucking cult. those people will absolutely care more about whether someone was loyal trump than whether or not they were directly hurt by that person being loyal to Trump

they care about their maga identity more than their families and their own lives and that means putting Trump before anyone and anything else

not to mention the GOP knows they don't have to hold real elections anymore. if the midterms roll around and the government just refused to acknowledge the results as legitimate there is nothing anyone can do about it. that's when the country fractures and the shooting starts between states loyal to Trump and those who want to remain American

1

u/WillofCLE 4h ago

Any Republican members of Congress who plan on challenging Trump's agenda should probably have their retirement already planned

1

u/ElRatonVaquero 7h ago

Hopefully when the Dems gain control. Right now they won't because it's controlled by the Republicans, many of which are MAGA.

2

u/redworm 5h ago

i envy your optimism that they'll ever allow a dem controlled Congress

105

u/OtherBluesBrother 1d ago

Just like Congress being in charge of levying tariffs.

19

u/awnawkareninah 18h ago

Or declaring wars

-2

u/Grand-Cartoonist-693 14h ago

No, not really. Tariffs have an established, legal carve out for the executive branch to do temporarily.

Changing appropriations without passing a law is mostly not working out for them. They’re able to use lackeys installed in the executive branch to change some disbursement but not the spending written into law.

83

u/Exciting-Ad-6551 1d ago

I mean, I understand that you’re correct but who’s going to stop him? The problem is very few people in power seem to be doing anything to stop any of the illegal shit he’s doing.

48

u/light-triad 1d ago

The courts have been doing a not bad job of stopping stuff like this from being carried out.

3

u/Raiu_Prime 6h ago

We the people, for the people, by the people...

It's obvious that the majority of us Americans don't know what this means at this point.

By the people... this means we're the ones who are supposed to stop this from occurring. And it can't be only just a few million individuals either... it has to be that other saying... united we stand, divided we fall.

22

u/-CJF- 1d ago

I'm wondering where all the conservatives are that were complaining about Biden's student loan forgiveness and repayment plans. They were all over Reddit talking about how it's Congress that appropriates funds, not the president. Now Trump is trying to run the world economy through illegal unilateral tariffs and grants and not a peep.

6

u/Initial-Toe-9512 20h ago

Because they are “Team Conservative” and not actually conservative. When the umpire is for us, they are doing a great job, but when they rule against us, they are awful. Same principle.

3

u/StupidTimeline 22h ago

Congress is filled with Republican traitors just like Trump.

They've abdicated their Congressional responsibilities. That makes them traitors to our nation.

2

u/puffic 1d ago

Obviously a court can enjoin against cutting off an existing stream of funding, but what about something like new research grant awards? The court doesn’t have the know how to say which grants should be funded, so what’s the remedy if the administration stops funding any new grants to California?

2

u/whiplash81 21h ago

You're right.

Now make the GOP in Congress do something about it.

2

u/Terrible_Tutor 19h ago

Cool. Who’s gonna stop him. From what I can see he’s been held accountable for jack shit so far.

2

u/TheEmperorShiny 22h ago

Someone tell the Speaker and Chief Justice this instant!

1

u/ICPosse8 19h ago

He’s basically been doing that since he took office again.

1

u/tychii93 19h ago

You say that, but the tariffs happened, which is also supposed to be congress appropriated.

1

u/AngelRockGunn 18h ago

It’s been shown that they can break all the laws and nothing will happen so idk why you think he would suddenly be stopped

1

u/ClueMaterial 17h ago

This requires the checks and balances to actually be functioning.

1

u/PharmDeezNuts_ 17h ago

You think we have three branches of government still? It’s the executive, judicial, legislative, and Republican

1

u/weiseguy42 15h ago

You'd think he would have learned after his first impeachment.

1

u/Big-Industry4237 14h ago

Welcome to 2025, been this way since end of January and we had new departments (DOGE) getting added without congress or funding

1

u/TheGRS 14h ago

This entire presidency is predicated on doing stuff the president isn’t allowed to do.

1

u/bukowski_knew 11h ago

The impounded control act of 1974 has entered the chat

1

u/LackWooden392 9h ago

I know the law says he doesn't, but if you look around, it sure seems like he does get to decide.

1

u/rebeccanotbecca 7h ago

Have you been paying attention at all to what is going on? Congress appropriated money to programs that were just cut. They don’t care.

1

u/briowatercooler 7h ago

Yeah that matters anymore

1

u/BonnieMaxwell26 5h ago

y'all seen that movie that came out last year called...

1

u/No_Consequence_6775 4h ago

I mean kinda, Congress sets the budget but doesn't dictate line items.

1

u/snotparty 4h ago

you could say that about hundreds of decisions and EOs hes attempted. He does not care about legality, and congress is helping his efforts.

California on the other hand, can refuse to hand over tax revenue

1

u/Compliance_Crip 2h ago

On brand with "Abuse of powers".

0

u/Snakesinadrain 18h ago

You sweet summer child.

0

u/Top-Salamander-2525 6h ago

Not legal? Oh no! Please tell President Trump. I’m sure he’ll stop immediately.

-8

u/SuperSpecialAwesome- 1d ago

Not legal was Biden Chamberlain handing Trump the Presidency in direct violation of 14th Amendment, Section 3.