Trump uses repeated funding cuts to pressure California, complicating state’s legal fight

For victims of crime, the Federal Office announced in the summer that millions of dollars approved for victims of domestic violence and other crime victims will be hidden from states that do not comply with the immigration policies of the Trump administration.

California, the other 19 states and the Columbia region filed a lawsuit, claiming that such prerequisites were illegal and weaken public security.

The administration later received a different struggle by explaining that community organizations that receive such funds from states to help people escape from violence, access shelters and files to restrict orders against abusers – usually not to use unquarned immigrants.

California and other states filed a lawsuit again, arguing that the needs of the administration – states should be implemented. Lawyers agreed, saying that scanning from such programs would be cruel.

Repeated cases reflect an increasingly familiar pattern on the Growing Mountain Mountain between the Trump administration, California and other blue states.

Since his assignment in January, President Trump forced the state to submit to a series of policy fronts by cutting the Federal Funds, which were part of the urge to jump and execute the Congress. When these interruptions were challenged in court again and again, the management shifted the approach of pursuing the same or similar funds from a slightly different angle – further lawsuits.

Repeated lawsuits have already added complexity and volume to a monumental legal war between the administration and the states such as California.

The White House had previously rejected California’s cases and defended the right to put into force the policy agenda, including Trump’s funds. When asked about changing strategies in some of these cases, Abigail Jackson, a White House spokesman, said that the administration has gained a large number of lawsuits on expenditure deductions in the high court and will continue to legally reduce waste expenditures throughout the government ”.

Other management officials defended their legal tactics. For example, during the fight against frozen federal financing earlier this year, Vice President JD Vance wrote on social media, which revealed concerns about a constitutional crisis.

California Atty. General Rob Bonda said that the model was the result of the power of Trump’s power to exaggerate the power of controlling federal financing and using it as a weapon against its political opponents, as well as being a result of the superiority of law and the dangerous against both the congress and the authority of federal judges. The office has sued the management more than 40 times since January, many times on financing.

Bond is not something you need to see, but a federal government that is the president of the United States is very humiliating from the rule of law and is willing to break and break it again, tell a court that they have violated the law and then it is said that it should be said again by the court again, Bond said Bonda.

And still, he said that such examples were abundant. For example, the Ministry of Justice said that attempts to rob the victim of California to rob the crime finance, the Ministry of Internal Security has recently repeated attempts to reject the State Disaster Assistance and Anti -Terrorism Financing.

Internal security officials first, states, such funds, such funds will be conditioned to comply with the efforts of immigration, he said. California and other states filed a lawsuit, and a federal judge rejected such prerequisites contrary to the constitution.

The administration then reported that the states who refused to comply with California, that the states cooperating with immigration sanctions will receive more money – for hundreds of millions of dollars.

California and other democratic leaderships again filed a lawsuit again, arguing that the change of funds this week was nothing more than the administration that survived the court’s previous decision against the conditioning of funds.

Bonda’s office, on Thursday, announced that the Trump administration supports major cuts in the American financing of American. Winning came after the state and others after the following trial tours, Bonda’s office, despite a previous court decision, including a modified complaint that accused of continuing to stop the financing that prevents him from doing so.

Bonda said that such changing strategies were “consistent and brazenly unlawful and unlawful Federal Management ve and that his office was“ task ”, as well as Will to fight and Will.

“You cannot take an action, you can account, a court finds that you are illegal, and then you take another illegal action to restrict or hide the same fund,” he said.

Erwin Chezerinsky Dean of UC Berkeley law, Bonda and Trump administration, “ignoring the orders of the court or a model to try to overcome them,” he said.

And he gave another example: a case in which he represented the Faculty of California University and represents researchers who challenge the National Science Foundation Financing of the Trump administration.

After a judge prevented the termination of the financing of the administration, the Trump administration replaced it by declaring that funds were “suspended”.

Later, the judge decided that the administration had violated the termination order.

Michigan at the University of Dearborn Mitchel Sollenberger, a professor of political science and the author of a few books on the administrator forces, said Trump is expected to stretch these forces aggressively. Conservative leaders are trying to restore the executive authority after Watergate chaired the Congress at the Presidency, and Trump adopted an aggressive approach in the first period.

However, Trump said that he was still striking that he was doing this term-Sollenberger-A Supreme Court, a clear track that clearly believes in a executive branch strengthened by a Supreme Court, was the result of a sophisticated and well-planned strategy.

“Like watching the end of the water and trying to find cracks, Sol Sollenberger said. “Trump management is doing this. He is trying to find cracks that he can expand the gap and exercise more executive power.”

Bonda said that the aim of the management of the management of the blue state financing started immediately after Trump’s start, and that the management and budget office was in accordance with Trump’s policy goals, and said that a large amount of federal funds for any program freezing.

California and other states have won and won this movement, but the management did not swing from the strategy, Bonda said Bonda – as proved by new events.

On Wednesday, while the government’s closing to the Congress’ inability to pass a financing measures, the Russell Vought-Management and Budget Office President and the Architect of the Trump administration’s bag-telli policies were canceled for $ 8 billion to feed the climate day of the Left. Later, he listed 16 blue states where the projects will be cut.

Vought, Trump’s campaign strongly rejected any connection during the campaign, but since then extensively implemented, the right -wing game book for Trump’s second period, Project 2025, the government had summarized the ideas of interrupting extensively.

On Thursday, Trump seemed to enjoy the opportunity to apply more of the plan.

“Today I have a meeting with the fame of the Project 2025, which suggests which of many democratic agencies, most of which have a political scam, and whether these cuts are temporary or permanent,” Trump sent online. “I can’t believe that the radical left democrats give me an unprecedented opportunity.”

Bonda said on Wednesday, his office, Trump and “Trump to understand,” he said. But he said he was watching the war closely.

Senator Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) The last part of Vought, such as California, the politically resisting blue states, the more illegal targeting of the blue states, “to punish the political enemies of the Blue states illegally broke our democracy.”

Cities and towns are also back to use Trump’s federal financing as a political leverage. On Wednesday, Los Angeles and other cities announced a lawsuit that challenged interruptions in disaster financing.

La City Atty. Hydee Feldstein Soto said the deductions were part of the Trump administration’s part of the federal fund’s “unprecedented armament ve, and that he was proud to fight to ür protect the constitutional boundaries on extreme access”.