Sustainability Institute v. Trump

Public Rights Project and Southern Environmental Law Center filed a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s freeze on federal funding for critical programs, ranging from energy efficient affordable housing to food access for communities and support for local farmers. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of 6 cities and 11 nonprofits.

Since the “Unleashing American Energy” executive order was issued in January, there have been widespread accounts of funds repeatedly being frozen and unfrozen with little or no explanation by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Environmental Protection Agency, and Department of Transportation.

The lawsuit argues that the agencies’ actions violate the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, as well as the Administrative Procedure Act and the Impoundment Control Act. It also states that the executive order and agency actions are unconstitutional.

The lawsuit explains the turmoil resulting from the funding freeze, featuring statements from multiple cities and organizations on its harmful effects, such as preventing home energy upgrades that reduce utility costs and hindering initiatives to mitigate extreme heat in urban areas. 

Update:

On March 26, Public Rights Project and Southern Environmental Law Center filed a request for a preliminary injunction, asking the court to stop the funding freeze from going into effect until the case is decided. A hearing was set for April 23.

Ahead of the hearing where the court will hear oral arguments on the preliminary injunction request, Public Rights Project and SELC filed a reply, rebutting the Trump administration’s arguments to the court. 

The administration is attempting to recast the funding freezes as a simple contract dispute in order to avoid accountability for violating federal law and the Constitution. Congress appropriated these federal grants for communities and local groups, and the executive branch cannot ignore these congressional mandates. The administration also characterized the chaotic funding freezes as a “temporary pause.” Citing Trump’s executive orders and public statements, we contend that the administration has no intention of spending the funding as directed by Congress.  

On April 23, the judge heard arguments from both parties and requested additional information from the government before making a ruling. In particular, he asked that the defendants provide information as to why each of the grants at issue in this case have been frozen or terminated, or are in process of being terminated. 

On May 20, the judge issued a final judgement that requires the Trump administration to restore federal grants that were frozen or terminated. This order was in response to our claims that the government violated a federal law — the Administrative Procedures Act — that establishes how federal agencies operate and make rules. The judge also issued a preliminary injunction related to our claims that government agencies’ actions implementing the “Unleashing American Energy” executive order are unconstitutional.

Read the decision.