Trump EPA Freeze Stopped by Democratic-Past Judge

Gavel and open book in library setting

A federal judge with Democratic ties has blocked President Trump’s EPA from reclaiming billions in Biden-era climate grants, continuing a pattern of judicial interference with the administration’s agenda.

Quick Takes

  • U.S. District Judge Mary McElroy ordered the unfreezing of $14 billion in climate funding from the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act
  • The EPA had claimed the funds were frozen due to concerns about waste, fraud, and abuse, but could not provide evidence
  • Judge McElroy has a history of Democratic activism and was initially nominated by Obama before being appointed under Trump
  • Senator Mike Lee has introduced legislation to limit district judges’ ability to issue nationwide injunctions against presidential actions
  • The ruling states federal agencies cannot indefinitely hinder statutes passed by Congress to advance a president’s agenda

Judge Orders Biden-Era Climate Funds Released

U.S. District Judge Mary McElroy has indefinitely blocked the Environmental Protection Agency from reclaiming billions in climate grants that were approved during the Biden administration. The ruling forces Citibank to unfreeze approximately $14 billion of the total $20 billion in funds that were allocated through the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. These grants were intended for climate-friendly projects, including battery factories and electric school buses across multiple states, including those that traditionally vote Republican.

In her ruling, Judge McElroy emphasized that federal agencies do not have unlimited authority to advance a president’s policy priorities at the expense of laws passed by Congress. The EPA had directed Citibank to freeze the funds, citing potential waste, fraud, and abuse, allegedly based on a Project Veritas video. However, government attorneys were unable to provide concrete evidence of wrongdoing when challenged in court.

Grant Recipients Celebrate Court Victory

The decision represents a significant setback for the Trump administration’s efforts to redirect environmental funding toward projects more aligned with its priorities. The Justice Department argued that the court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case, but Judge McElroy rejected this claim, allowing the lawsuit to proceed. The ruling has been celebrated by the organizations that had been awarded the grants, who viewed the EPA’s actions as an overreach of executive authority.

“Today’s decision gives us a chance to breathe after the EPA unlawfully — and without due process — terminated our awards and blocked access to funds that were appropriated by Congress and legally obligated,” said Beth Bafford, CEO of Climate United.

The funds were already dispersed to the recipient organizations before the attempted clawback. As Vincent Levy, an attorney representing the grant recipients, plainly stated, “The money was dispersed.” The Biden administration has filed an appeal against Judge McElroy’s ruling, with detailed arguments expected in an upcoming memorandum.

Judge’s Background Raises Questions About Impartiality

Judge McElroy’s background has come under scrutiny following her decision. She has a history of Democratic political activism, having worked on campaigns for Democratic candidates Julius V. Michaelson and James E. O’Neil. She also served as a volunteer at a Democratic National Convention. McElroy was initially nominated for her judicial position by former President Barack Obama, though her confirmation ultimately came during the Trump administration.

“Agencies do not have unlimited authority to further a President’s agenda, nor do they have unfettered power to hamstring in perpetuity two statutes passed by Congress during the previous administration,” Judge McElroy wrote in her decision.

This is not the first time McElroy has blocked Trump administration initiatives. She previously halted efforts to cut state health grants, citing “irreparable harm” to states and agencies if the funding ceased. These repeated judicial interventions against presidential priorities have sparked a legislative response from some members of Congress concerned about the scope of judicial authority.

Legislative Pushback Against Judicial Overreach

In response to what many conservatives see as judicial overreach, Senator Mike Lee has introduced the Judicial Insurrectionists Act. The proposed legislation aims to expedite Supreme Court review of injunctions issued against the executive branch by individual district court judges. The bill reflects growing concerns about single judges wielding nationwide power to block presidential directives and executive agency actions.

“America’s government cannot function if the legitimate orders of our Commander in Chief can be overridden at the whim of a single district court judge. They have presumed to run the military, the civil service, foreign aid, and HR departments across the Executive Branch—blatantly unconstitutional overreach,” said Senator Lee in defense of his proposed legislation.

The ongoing legal battle highlights the tension between presidential authority and judicial review, particularly when policies shift dramatically between administrations. For the time being, the previously awarded climate funds will continue flowing to their intended recipients, even as the administration seeks to redirect federal resources toward its own environmental and energy priorities through other means.

Sources:

  1. Judge blocks Trump EPA from clawing back billions in Biden-era climate grants
  2. Judge blocks Trump EPA from freezing clean energy funds
  3. Judge Who Blocked Trump from Freezing EPA, Energy Funds Is Former Democrat Activist

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR