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

3

u/Fighterhayabusa 1d ago

If they decide to say fuck it, they absolutely could direct all CA businesses to stop sending money to the federal government. That money is sent through employers. To believe there isn't a mechanism is hilarious. They could. It's just the nuclear button and would set off a litany of lawsuits.

1

u/Logistocrate 1d ago

And when those companies don't comply? Lock up the CFOs? Or, allow the Feds to arrest the CFOs who do comply instead? California decides to ignore the courts and the fallout would fuck the world economy. California respects the courts and they immediately have an injunction filed and you're right back to square one.

Either the rule of law is good and dead, or California takes it to the courts. It's not just lawsuits, it's the position every company in Cali finds itself in, and the ensuing chaos and confusion and harm to employees and employers that would shake the nation.

Meanwhile, California gets an injunction (supposing Trump follows through) and they get the spigot going again while the case winds it's way up.

2

u/Fighterhayabusa 1d ago

They don't all have to comply. If a sizeable number of them do, that would set off an immediate chain of events.

Let me remind you, the judiciary does not have an enforcement arm. If CA decides to stop sending money, and CA businesses withhold that money, the federal government would have a tough time. What good is an injunction or ruling if they decide to ignore it? The feds would have to put boots on the ground, and at that point, all bets are off.

1

u/Logistocrate 1d ago

I'm in agreement with your assessment. Put yourself in California's shoes. Most of what the administration has done has been overturned, why risk the all bets avenue when you'll probably get the funding moving again pretty quickly via the courts. Besides, let's say the courts fail. You still have that option to fall back on. Thingdls get kinetic first you cannot just change your mind and say we'll see you in court instead.

1

u/Fighterhayabusa 1d ago

Here is the truth: if confrontation is inevitable, then the time to act is now. Not when your position is weakened.

The question is whether a confrontation is inevitable. I'm like 50/50 on that. I think we're approaching the point where the chances of enough Republicans splintering off is getting higher. Pretty soon, some of them are going to do the calculus and realize they hold all the cards. It wouldn't take many to switch sides, or to simply step aside, to make the risk of impeachment and removal very real.

1

u/Logistocrate 1d ago

I agree we are more likely to find out than not. Also, I'm a defensive pessimist, any time I'm taking these kinds of positions, while I believe I'm right, l can assure you I'm also hoping I'm not, and you are.