Trump-appointed federal judge blocks Trump cuts of $11 billion in public health grants from the pandemic

Another judge has stepped in to temporarily block the Trump administration — this time related to $11 billion in public health grants left over from the coronavirus pandemic.

The U.S. Health and Human Services Department argued in favor of the cuts, saying that the programs were no longer necessary since the pandemic had officially ended. The lawsuit was filed by 23 states and the District of Columbia to keep the money spigot open.

‘I’ll keep standing up to defend Pennsylvania taxpayers, permanently reverse these unlawful cuts, and hold the federal government to the commitments it has made to our Commonwealth.’

U.S. District Judge Mary McElroy in Rhode Island said the funds should be maintained until the court could make a full ruling on the case.

“They make a case, a strong case, for the fact that they will succeed on the merits, so I’m going to grant the temporary restraining order,” she said.

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, a Democrat, praised the ruling that preserved federal funds flowing to the state.

“We just won in court to stop the Trump Administration’s illegal cuts of more than half a billion dollars in public health grants owed to Pennsylvania,” wrote Shapiro.

“These dollars have been committed to us for critical priorities like mitigating HPAI and measles, providing long-term care for older adults, and ensuring access to immunizations for children,” he added. “As a result of taking the Administration to court, these dollars will now start flowing again. I’ll keep standing up to defend Pennsylvania taxpayers, permanently reverse these unlawful cuts, and hold the federal government to the commitments it has made to our Commonwealth.”

McElroy was appointed by Trump in his first term in 2019.

President Donald Trump and his allies have decried the stumbling blocks set in front of his agenda by judges, but some critics have scolded the administration for trying to shut down judicial dissent outside the traditional appellate process.

“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,” wrote Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts in a brief statement.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!