Judge blocks Trump child care funding freeze for five Democratic states

The ruling temporarily halts a Department of Health and Human Services policy announced Tuesday that froze funds from three federal grant programs — the Child Care and Development Fund, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, and the Social Services Block Grant — for the five states. HHS cited an unsubstantiated belief that the states were providing benefits to people in the country illegally but offered no evidence and did not explain why those five states were targeted rather than others.

A federal judge on Friday blocked the Trump administration from freezing billions of dollars in annual funding for child care subsidies and social services in five Democratic-led states, finding that California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, and New York had met the legal threshold to pause the policy while litigation proceeds.

U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, nominated to the bench by President Joe Biden, issued the temporary order after the five states argued that a funding freeze announced earlier in the week was causing immediate “operational chaos.” The judge did not rule on whether the freeze was lawful but said the states had shown sufficient grounds “to protect the status quo” for at least 14 days while arguments are made in court.

“This is a critical victory for families whose lives have been upended by this administration’s cruelty,” New York Attorney General Letitia James, who is leading the lawsuit, said after the ruling.

The frozen programs

The Department of Health and Human Services announced Tuesday that it was pausing funds from three federal grant programs to the five states: the Child Care and Development Fund, which subsidizes child care for 1.3 million children from low-income families; Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, which provides cash assistance and job training; and the Social Services Block Grant. The five states say they receive a total of more than $10 billion a year from the three programs.

HHS said it was pausing the money because it had “reason to believe” the states were providing benefits to people in the country illegally. The agency did not provide evidence for that assertion or explain why those five states were singled out rather than others.

The five states contend the freeze is unconstitutional and intended to target Trump’s political adversaries rather than address fraud — which the states say they already work to prevent.

Data demands and a disputed record

As part of the freeze, the government requested the names and Social Security numbers of everyone who received benefits from some of the programs since 2022, according to court filings.

Jessica Ranucci, a lawyer in James’ office, told the court Friday that at least four of the five states had already had money delayed after requesting their regular disbursements. Kamika Shaw, a lawyer for the federal government, said it was her understanding that money had not stopped flowing to the states.

The other 45 states were not subject to the freeze but do face a new requirement to check attendance at child care centers and submit “strong justification for the use of funds” that aligns with each program’s purpose.

HHS officials did not respond to a request for comment on the ruling.

A separate freeze targeting Minnesota

At roughly the same time the court blocked the child care funding freeze, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins announced a separate action: a freeze of approximately $130 million a year in Agriculture Department funding to Minnesota.

Rollins cited the Feeding Our Future fraud scandal. Federal prosecutors have said the Minnesota nonprofit stole $250 million from a program meant to feed children during the COVID-19 pandemic; 78 people have been charged since 2022 and 57 convicted.

In a letter to Gov. Tim Walz that Rollins shared on social media, she said Minnesota could restore access to the funding by providing justification for how it spent federal dollars over the past year. All future transactions involving Agriculture Department money would require the same justification, she said. Walz’s office did not have a comment Friday evening.

Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison said he would fight the Agriculture Department freeze in court.

Minnesota has been a recurring target of the Trump administration in its second term. The president in December called the state’s Somali population “garbage” in connection with the Feeding Our Future investigation and other fraud cases involving Somali defendants. Earlier this week, the administration launched what it described as the largest immigration enforcement operation in history in Minneapolis, an action that ended in the fatal shooting of a woman by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent.