Justice Department must reinstate ABA domestic violence grants, judge says
The Justice Department unconstitutionally retaliated against the American Bar Association by terminating grants for a program aimed at helping victims of domestic violence, a federal judge ruled Wednesday.
Five grants from DOJ's Office on Violence Against Women to the ABA's Commission on Domestic and Sexual Violence totaling $3.2 million must be reinstated and fully paid out, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper ruled.
'The ABA has made a strong showing that Defendants terminated its grants to retaliate against it for engaging in protected speech,' Cooper wrote.
The grants at issue were terminated on April 10, one day after Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche issued a memo laying out new DOJ policy that severely limits the ability of department employees to attend or participate in ABA events or programs. The memo was sent to all department employees after the ABA joined an earlier lawsuit challenging a freeze on foreign aid grants via the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development. The ABA, the largest national association of lawyers in the country, then sued the Justice Department on April 23 over the canceled grants.
'The ABA is free to litigate in support of activist causes, including by inserting itself into pending litigation as an amicus curiae,' Blanche wrote in the memo. 'But 'public service is a public trust.' The Department of Justice must, consistent with the Constitution, be careful stewards of the public fisc, represent all Americans regardless of ideology or political preferences, and defend the policies chosen by American's democratically elected leadership.'
DOJ failed to show a sufficient motivation for terminating the grants other than retaliation, Cooper ruled.
'The government claims that it had a nonretaliatory motive for terminating the grants: They no longer aligned with DOJ's priorities,' Cooper wrote. 'But the government has not identified any nonretaliatory DOJ priorities, much less explained why they were suddenly deemed inconsistent with the goals of the affected grants.'
Other Office on Violence Against Women grant recipients have not had their funding disrupted and continue to conduct similar programs to the ABA's, Cooper noted. Losing this funding would require the ABA to lay off almost all of the staff at the Commission on Domestic and Sexual Violence, the group's chief counsel said in a declaration.
'The government has offered no nonretaliatory explanation for why it continues to fund these other OVW grantees after terminating the ABA's grants, or why these other grantees' projects still effectuate DOJ's priorities while the ABA's do not,' Cooper wrote.
Wednesday's order doesn't prevent DOJ from terminating the grants for 'permissible and truly nonretaliatory reasons,' though any further action to cancel the payments would be subject to more legal challenges. The order also doesn't require DOJ to renew the grants once the funds have been paid out.
The ABA has joined with other bar associations in recent months to criticize the Trump administration's efforts to punish lawyers and firms that represent certain clients, saying they are 'designed to cow our country's judges, our country's courts and our legal profession.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Insurrection Act not off the table for LA protests, Trump says
The Brief Speaking to reporters Sunday, Trump did not rule out invoking the Insurrection Act in response to the Los Angeles ICE protests. "We're not going to let them get away with it. We're going to have troops everywhere," Trump said. President Donald Trump said he won't rule out invoking the Insurrection Act as violent protests against federal immigration officers continue in Los Angeles for a third day. National Guard troops clashed with protesters Sunday, firing tear gas at crowds as protesters moved onto the freeways surrounding downtown and blocked traffic. Police said two LAPD officers were injured after they were hit by motorcyclists who tried to breach a skirmish line. Trump deployed hundreds of National Guard troops to California after confrontations between federal immigration officers and protesters who tried to stop them from carrying out immigration sweeps. THE LATEST: LA ICE protests, Day 3: National Guard arrives, as directed by Trump The backstory The Insurrection Act allows presidents to call on reserve or active-duty military units to respond to unrest in the states, an authority that is not reviewable by the courts. One of its few guardrails requires the president to request that the participants disperse. Congress passed the act in 1792, just four years after the Constitution was ratified. Joseph Nunn, a national security expert with the Brennan Center for Justice, told The Associated Press it's an amalgamation of different statutes enacted between then and the 1870s, a time when there was little in the way of local law enforcement. "It is a law that in many ways was created for a country that doesn't exist anymore," he added. READ MORE: Torrance 9-year-old detained by ICE faces potential deportation to Honduras It also is one of the most substantial exceptions to the Posse Comitatus Act, which generally prohibits using the military for law enforcement purposes. What they're saying Speaking to reporters Sunday, Trump did not rule out invoking the Insurrection Act in response to the Los Angeles ICE protests. "Depends on whether or not there's an insurrection," Trump said. "We're not going to let them get away with it. We're going to have troops everywhere, we're not going to let this happen to our country. We're not going to let our country be torn apart." Trump said he did not believe the protests constituted an insurrection as of Sunday afternoon, but he said, "you have violent people, and we're not going to let them get away with that." Dig deeper Presidents have issued a total of 40 proclamations invoking the law, some of those done multiple times for the same crisis, Nunn said. Lyndon Johnson invoked it three times — in Baltimore, Chicago and Washington — in response to the unrest in cities after the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968. During the Civil Rights era, Presidents Johnson, John F. Kennedy and Dwight Eisenhower used the law to protect activists and students desegregating schools. Eisenhower sent the 101st Airborne to Little Rock, Arkansas, to protect Black students integrating Central High School after that state's governor activated the National Guard to keep the students out. George H.W. Bush was the last president to use the Insurrection Act, a response to riots in Los Angeles in 1992 after the acquittal of the white police officers who beat Black motorist Rodney King in an incident that was videotaped. The Source This report includes information from President Donald Trump's comments to reporters Sunday and previous reporting from FOX TV Stations. FOX's Catherine Stoddard contributed.
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Hays County Judge calls for humane immigration practices amid rising detentions
HAYS COUNTY, Texas (KXAN) – The Hays County Commissioners Court will consider adopting a resolution Tuesday calling for due process and humane treatment of immigrants. Hays County Judge Ruben Becerra said he's bringing forward the resolution because of recent federal immigration activity that has caused disorder across the county. 'The resolution I'm presenting on Tuesday is about us being Americans, being respectful, respecting the rule of law,' Becerra said. 'What I want to do is help support peace, unity, and harmony throughout our county.' Becerra said there has been an increase in federal immigration officers detaining people in Hays County since the Trump Administration took office. According to a KXAN special project, over 12,000 undocumented immigrants living in Texas were detained from January to March, the most of any other state. 'I'm not looking for anything except to treat people like humans, be respectful, follow the rule of law, and let's move in an orderly manner without causing havoc and destruction,' Becerra said. Texas immigration attorney Adrian Resendez said immigrant detainments have steadily risen in the last several months. 'There are only certain amounts of ICE agents available, and only a certain amount of resources that the government allocated. Now what we're seeing is a larger allocation of resources, we are seeing a ramping up across the board,' Resendez said. Fox News reported in May that the Trump Administration raised its ICE arrest target to 3,000 undocumented immigrants per day. Resendez said he has clients who were following the proper procedures but were still arrested and detained. 'The controversy is now that they are detaining people who technically followed all the rules that were asked of them,' he said. 'We are seeing some people being detained who have been here [several years] – they're permanent residents.' Resendez said that due process in an immigration context could involve someone arriving in the U.S. to flee danger in their home country. If that claim is deemed credible, they would be given a court date to make their case. 'That court date, that's the due process that they get,' Resendez said. 'In my opinion, I am seeing a lack of due process.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
What are Canada's governing Liberals going to do about AI?
Fresh off his election victory, Prime Minister Mark Carney has been focused on standing up to Donald Trump's claims on Canada as the 51st state and American tariffs. But while that political drama unfolds, one topic that seems to have quietly slipped under the radar is the rise of artificial intelligence. Despite its transformative impact on everything from jobs to national security, AI received surprisingly little attention during the campaign and in the first weeks following Carney's victory. The consequences of that lack of attention are already starting to show, as emissions and electricity costs continue unabated without a clear vision of where AI fits in. Read more: Although Carney has appointed former journalist Evan Solomon as Canada's first-ever AI minister, it's not yet clear what action the Liberal government plans to take on AI. The Liberals' 'Canada Strong' plan outlining the prime minister's proposals is scarce on details. Still, it provides some clues on how the Liberals see AI and what they believe it offers to the Canadian economy — and also what they seem to have misunderstood. First, the plan includes some robust initiatives for improving Canada's digital infrastructure, which lags behind other leading countries, especially in terms of rural broadband and reliable cell service. To accomplish these goals, the Liberals say they'll incentivize investment by 'introducing flow-through shares to our Canadian startup ecosystem…to raise money faster' for AI and other technologies. In other words, they will reuse the model of mining and oil companies whereby investors can claim a tax deduction for the same amount as their investment. A major question is whether Canada's investment ecosystem has enough big players willing to take these risks. The plan gets less promising as it comes to the implementation of AI within 'the economy of tomorrow.' The Liberals say they plan to build more data centres, improve computing capacity and create digital supply chain solutions 'to improve efficiency and reduce costs for Canadians.' All that that sounds OK — so far. But how will they do this? The Liberals plan to establish the Bureau of Research, Engineering and Advanced Leadership in Science (BOREALIS), linking AI development directly to the Canadian Armed Forces and the Communications Security Establishment Canada, which provides the federal government with information technology security and foreign signals intelligence. This approach to AI is focused on what it offers to Canada's defence, whether by manufacturing semiconductors or improving intelligence gathering, so that it can rely less on the U.S. Similarly, Canadian defence tech firms will access funding to help reduce dependence on American suppliers and networks. The Liberals are pledging sovereignty and autonomy for Canada's defence and security, all enabled by 'the construction and development of AI infrastructure.' What goes unsaid is the intense power needs of data centres, and the consequences for emissions and climate action of 'building the next generation of data centres' in Canada. New data centres cannot be built without also constructing more renewable energy infrastructure, and none of this addresses emissions or climate change. If the centres crop up in big numbers as planned, Canadians could also see their electricity costs go up or become less reliable. That's because finding space within the existing grid is not as easy as it may sound when AI data centres require over 100 megawatts (MW) of electricity demand versus five to 10 MW for a regular centre. With the rapidly evolving market for AI-based data centres, Canadian policymakers need to provide clear guidance to utilities in terms of their current decisions on competing industrial-scale demands. As the Canadian Climate Institute points out: 'Anything less risks higher rates, increased emissions, missed economic opportunities — or all of the above.' So far, the Liberal plan fails to address any of these concerns. What else does the 'economy of tomorrow' hold? Apparently, it means more efficient government. According to the Liberal plan, AI 'is how government improves service delivery, it is how government keeps up with the speed of business, and it is how government maximizes efficiency and reduces cost.' Despite otherwise clashing with the Trump administration, this language is reminiscent of Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which has also centred its use of AI. Read more: The Liberals will open an Office of Digital Transformation, which aims to get rid of red tape and 'reduce barriers for businesses to operate in Canada.' They don't seem to really know what this would actually look like, however. They say: 'This could mean using AI to address government service backlogs and improve service delivery times, so that Canadians get better services, faster.' Their fiscal plan points out that this frame of thinking applies to every single expenditure: 'We will look at every new dollar being spent through the lens of how AI and technology can improve service and reduce costs.' The economy will also benefit, the government argues, from AI commercialization, with $46 million pegged over the next four years to connect AI researchers with businesses. This would work alongside a tax credit for small and medium-sized businesses to 'leverage AI to boost their bottom lines, create jobs, and support existing employees.' But a new report by Orgvue, the organizational design and planning software platform, shows that over half of businesses that rushed to impose AI just ended up making their employees redundant without clear gains in productivity. Creating a tax credit for smaller companies to introduce AI seems like a recipe for repeating the same mistake. Much of the Liberal plan seems to involve taking risks. There's a shortsightedness on this rapidly advancing technology that requires significant guardrails. The government seem to view AI as a solutions machine, buying into the hype around it without taking the time to understand it. As policy is properly hashed out in the weeks and months to come, the Liberals' feet will have to be held to the fire on the issue of AI. Canadians must benefit from its limited uses and be protected from its abuses. This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organisation bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Jake Pitre, Concordia University Read more: Canada has a chance to lead on AI policy and data governance at the 2025 G7 Leaders' Summit Artificial intelligence should not be allowed to adjudicate cases in Canada's Federal Court AI and criminal justice: How AI can support — not undermine — justice Jake Pitre does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
