EO – State Attorneys General Blog

March 7, 2025March 7, 2025 by Christopher H. Casey

District Court Orders Trump Administration to Release Federal Funding to States and Enjoins Implementation of Federal Funding Freeze

On March 6, 2025, Judge John J. McConnell of the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island granted the Motion for Preliminary Injunction sought by 22 state attorneys general and the Attorney General for the District of Columbia challenging the Trump Administration’s “pause” or “freeze” of grant funding payments. The Court, ordered the Trump Administration to “release and transmit any disbursements to the States on awarded grants, executed contracts or other executed financial obligations that were paused on the grounds of the OMB Directive” and other related Executive Orders. In his 45-page order, Judge McConnell held that the Trump Administration’s freeze on federal funding “fundamentally undermines” the separation of powers.

In support of their motion, the state attorneys general presented evidence of the widespread effects of the federal funding freeze, which they said has impacted “nearly all aspects of the States’ governmental operations” and has inhibited the States’ “ability to administer vital services to their residents.” These harms, they argued, are a direct result of the efforts taken by the Trump Administration to withhold federal funds and implement the federal funding freeze.

February 25, 2025February 26, 2025 by Karen Lehmann Alexander

Multistate Coalition of Attorneys General Issue Guidance on DEI/DEIA Employment Initiatives Following Executive Order

On February 13, 2025, a coalition of 16 Attorneys General issued a document titled “Multi-State Guidance Concerning Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility Employment Initiatives” (“Guidance”). The stated purpose of the Guidance is “to help businesses, nonprofits, and other organizations operating in our respective states understand the continued viability and important role of diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility efforts” after private sector participants raised concerns about the continued viability of such policies and programming following an Executive Order that purports to target “illegal DEI and DEIA policies” across a wide range of organizations.

The Guidance reports that “diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility best practices are not illegal,” and that “the federal government does not have the legal authority to issue an executive order that prohibits otherwise lawful activities in the private sector or mandates the wholesale removal of these policies and practices within private organizations[.]” The Guidance contends that diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility initiatives help businesses prevent workplace discrimination and are consistent with federal and state law. The Guidance concludes with a list of best practices for diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility in the areas of recruitment and hiring, professional development and retention, and assessment and integration.

The Attorneys General for the states of Massachusetts, Illinois, Arizona, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Vermont joined in the Guidance. The full text can be found here.

Meanwhile, on February 21, 2025, in Nat’l Assoc. of Diversity Officers in Higher Ed. v. Trump, D. Md, the United States District Court for the District of Maryland issued a preliminary injunction that blocks, at least for now, some of the more salient provisions of the executive order that affect federal contractors and other private sector employers. In particular, the court took issue with the constitutionality of the certification and enforcement threat provisions (anchored in the False Claims Act). An analysis of the implications of the injunction for employers and others may be found here.

February 6, 2025February 6, 2025 by Christopher H. Casey

State Attorneys General Diverge on Birthright Citizenship Executive Order

On January 23, 2025, Judge John C. Coughenour of the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington granted a TRO in one of two cases (in Massachusetts and Washington federal courts) brought by attorneys general of 22 states and the District of Columbia to enjoin implementation of a Trump Administration Executive Order concerning “automatic” birthright citizenship. The Order, set to take effect on February 19, 2025, absent an injunction, directed federal agencies not to issue citizenship documents to those born in the United States to a mother who is unlawfully present or lawfully present on a temporary basis and a father who is neither a U.S. citizen nor a lawful permanent resident. The 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

In advance of preliminary injunction hearings in the Western District of Washington scheduled for February 6, 2025, a second group of 18 state attorneys general have filed an amici curiae brief in that district, opposing the preliminary injunction being sought by the other AGs. The amici AGs opposing the injunction includes the Attorneys General of Iowa, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah and Wyoming.

On February 5, 2025, Judge Deborah Boardman of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland granted a nationwide injunction halting the Executive Order in a separate suit brought by immigration advocacy groups. The preliminary injunction hearings in the two cases brought by the state AGs are still scheduled to go forward.