Federal judge blocks Trump administration from revoking billions in grants over policy priorities

US District Judge Indira Talwani ruled that agencies cannot cancel awarded funds based on goals introduced after grants were approved
Judge Indira Talwani ruled agencies could not impose new conditions on previously awarded federal grants (@DrcharlieWardQ/X, AP Photo)
Judge Indira Talwani ruled agencies could not impose new conditions on previously awarded federal grants (@DrcharlieWardQ/X, AP Photo)

WASHINGTON, DC: A federal judge has blocked the Trump administration from using a White House budget office regulation to cancel billions of dollars in previously awarded federal grants over changes in presidential priorities.

The ruling marks a setback for federal agencies that have sought to withdraw funding from programs the administration argued no longer matched its goals, including initiatives tied to diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts and climate-related programs.

Judge finds no legal basis for canceling previously awarded grants

In Boston, US District Judge Indira Talwani ruled in favor of a group of Democratic-led states, finding that the administration had improperly relied on an Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulation to revoke grants that had already been approved.

The regulation, which appeared in OMB rules in 2020 during President Donald Trump's first term and was later revised under President Joe Biden, allows agencies to terminate grants if they determine the funding "no longer effectuates the program goals or agency priorities."

President Donald Trump arrives to speak in the East Room of the White House, Thursday, July 16, 2026, in Washington. (Saul Loeb/Pool via AP)
President Donald Trump addressed reporters at the White House in Washington on July 16, 2026 (Saul Loeb/Pool via AP)

Since Trump returned to office, several federal agencies have used the provision to target funding for universities, crime prevention programs, school lunch initiatives and other programs.

Talwani, who was appointed by former President Barack Obama, wrote that the clause "does not permit agencies to terminate grants based on program goals and agency priorities identified after grants were awarded."

She said the administration's interpretation had no legal basis and that imposing such conditions on already awarded funds would violate the US Constitution. The judge noted that the regulation "demands only that grantees be apprised of those goals and priorities before grants are awarded."

The White House did not immediately comment on the ruling.

WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 30: A general view of the U.S. Supreme Court on June 30, 2020 in Washington, D
Democratic attorneys general and governors from 23 states and DC filed the lawsuit challenging grant cuts (Getty Images)

States challenge Trump administration grant cancellations

The lawsuit was filed last year by Democratic attorneys general and governors from 23 states and the District of Columbia, led by Massachusetts, New York and New Jersey.

The states argued that the administration had expanded the use of the OMB clause beyond its original purpose and given federal agencies broad authority to reclaim funding long after grants had been approved.

During court proceedings, the states warned that more than 1,100 active grants worth over $5 billion could be affected if the court did not intervene.

President Donald Trump speaks in the East Room of the White House, Thursday, July 16, 2026, in Washington. (Saul Loeb/Pool via AP)
President Donald Trump spoke from the East Room of the White House in Washington on July 16, 2026 (Saul Loeb/Pool via AP)

New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport, a Democrat, said the decision "confirms that the Trump administration defied the law when it embarked on its campaign to gut critical federal funding to the states."

The ruling adds to ongoing legal challenges over grant terminations across multiple federal agencies, as Democratic-led states have continued to challenge funding cuts they argue were driven by political priorities rather than program requirements.

It remains unclear whether the administration will appeal Friday's decision. The ruling could have broader implications for future efforts by federal agencies to withdraw previously awarded grants under the same regulatory provision.

GET BREAKING U.S. NEWS & POLITICAL UPDATES
STRAIGHT TO YOUR INBOX.

MORE STORIES

Nathan Sales argued that any future agreement would require the US to offer concessions while receiving promises that Iran would eventually break
3 hours ago
Don Lemon says he would favor a grassroots campaign model and criticizes Donald Trump's economic policies during a podcast appearance
4 hours ago
Donald Trump faced renewed comparisons with Jimmy Carter as Iran tensions and inflation persisted after a temporary US-Iran ceasefire collapsed
4 hours ago
CENTCOM said two US service members were killed in Iran's attack on Jordan, one remains missing, while four injured troops were treated and discharged
6 hours ago
Trump said the troops made the ultimate sacrifice to stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and warned of a wider conflict if Tehran isn't stopped
7 hours ago
The US State Department cited security risks, possible travel disruptions and a fluid regional situation in its latest global advisory
8 hours ago
President Donald Trump expands US military action as officials confirm two American service members died in Iran's attack on Jordan
8 hours ago
While no response has been announced, past US actions offer Trump options including strikes, sanctions, diplomacy and defensive deployments
12 hours ago
Eddins said state constitutions held the line when six justices walked away from those they were meant to protect, calling it design, not defiance
13 hours ago
Video showed Iranian ballistic missiles striking Jordan's Muwaffaq Salti Air Base, killing two US service members and injuring several others
13 hours ago