White House backs down on funding freeze
Stewart HuntingtonICT
Native leaders hailed a move by President Donald Trump's budget office Wednesday to rescind an order freezing spending on federal grants, less than two days after it sparked widespread confusion and legal challenges across Indian Country and beyond.
'I am happy for every federally recognized tribe, as well as states and organizations that this has affected in which the people that need services are going to be provided,' said OJ Semens, Sicangu Lakota, executive director of the Coalition of Large Tribes.
SUPPORT INDIGENOUS JOURNALISM.
The Monday evening order freezing the funds from the White House Office of Management and Budget sparked uncertainty over a crucial financial lifeline for tribes, states, schools and organizations that rely on trillions of dollars from Washington, and left the White House scrambling to explain what would and wouldn't be subject to a pause in funding.
Late Tuesday, a federal judge issued an injunction halting the order until Monday, Feb. 3. The White House issued the order rescinding the funding freeze in a terse memo Wednesday that leaves unanswered whether the funding freezes would be reinstated.
'OMB Memorandum M-25-13 is rescinded,' it stated. The memo was signed by Matthew J. Vaeth, acting director of the Office of Management and Budget.
White House posts on social media, however, indicated the memo had been suspended but not the administration's efforts to cut spending it opposes. And some reports continued to surface of difficulty accessing funds that had been suspended.The coalition, which represents some 20 Native nations with large land bases, demanded that the administration declare 'that any Federal funding going to Tribal governments or entities serving Tribal citizens is a legitimate Federal expense and need not be the subject of any further justification or paperwork by any Federal agency.'
The coalition further cited what it said were repeated difficulties tribal entities had accessing federal funding – even before Monday's funding freeze.
'Since January 23, 2025, tribal governments and tribal organizations that serve tribal citizens have encountered escalating problems with Federal accounts suddenly and without explanation 'zeroed out' and our access to Federal payment systems shut-off,' according to the coalition's resolution demanding the White House reverse course.
'These freezes were not limited in any way, and included everything – public safety funds, healthcare funds, waste management funds, child protective service funds, etc.," the statement said. "Most COLT Tribes are more than fifty percent funded by Federal dollars, meaning our tribal governments will have to shut down in days or weeks if the broad freeze persists, which would be devastating to our Tribal citizens.'
Semens said that his group had been in contact with White House officials and others before the order rescinding the funding pause was issued.
'We are very proactive reaching out to our congressional people, reaching out to the cabinet nominees,' Semens said. 'We are very, very proactive in ensuring that the individuals know what large land-based and treaty tribes are and need.'
Democratic U.S. Rep. Sharice Davids of Kansas said before the order rescinding the funding pause that the freeze on federal funding was not what the nation needed – or wanted.
'This is not what the people voted for, whichever party they supported,' said Davids, Ho-Chunk Nation of Wisconsin. 'America wants better prices at the supermarket and safe communities.'
Semens said that, while the latest series of events might be a new experience for tribes, there is always a learning curve with a new administration.
'We don't care whether they're on the Republican side or the Democratic side, we have worked through administrations,' he said. 'And every time there is a change in administrations, it comes down to us educating them on their treaty obligations. And you've got to remember, they pull in thousands of people and put them in jobs. And most of these people don't even know Indians exist. So it's a continual educational process that we have to go through.'
Other lawmakers hailed the apparent White House about-face.
"This is an important victory for the American people whose voices were heard after massive pressure from every corner of this country—real people made a difference by speaking out," said Sen. Patty Murray, a Democrat from Washington. "Still, the Trump administration – through a combination of sheer incompetence, cruel intentions, and a willful disregard of the law – caused real harm and chaos for millions over the span of the last 48 hours which is still ongoing."
Our stories are worth telling. Our stories are worth sharing. Our stories are worth your support. Contribute today to help ICT carry out its critical mission. Sign up for ICT's free newsletter.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Fox News
31 minutes ago
- Fox News
Newsom addresses Trump's threat to arrest him as the two spar over LA riot response: 'Point of no return'
California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, said he has crafted a plan in the event the Trump administration arrests him after he and President Donald Trump went head-to-head over the handling of the immigration protests in Los Angeles. Newsom said he and his team have "processed" what it would mean for him if the Trump administration secured a federal warrant for his arrest, Newsom said in an interview with the "Pod Save America" podcast hosted by former Obama administration officials that aired Monday night. "What's so absurd about that question is I've actually thought about it," Newsom said when asked about preparations in the event authorities take him into custody. "The fact that we are even having that conversation with our folks, and have had that conversation with our folks in the United States in 2025, I mean, it says everything you need to know about who's in the White House right now," Newsom said. Newsom also addressed the arrest threats in an interview with The Washington Post published Tuesday, signaling that the relationship between the two had reached a point beyond repair. "He just threatened my arrest. One would assume, or presume, that's the point of no return," Newsom told The Washington Post. "I'm constitutionally capable of working with people, even those that call for my arrest. So, I remain resolved in that respect, as I remain resolved to have the backs of kids whose lives are being threatened by his authoritarian tendencies." Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, first suggested in an interview with NBC News Saturday that Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass could face arrest if they hamper any federal efforts to deport illegal immigrants. In response, Newsom appeared to taunt Homan to take him into custody. "He's a tough guy. Why doesn't he do that? He knows where to find me," Newsom told MSNBC News Sunday. "That kind of bloviating is exhausting. So, Tom, arrest me. Let's go." When asked about threats to arrest Newsom, Trump told reporters Monday that Newsom's primary crime "is running for governor because he's done such a bad job," adding he would arrest Newsom if he were Homan. Newsom voiced disappointment in response to Trump's remarks and cautioned the threats amounted to a step toward authoritarianism. "The President of the United States just called for the arrest of a sitting Governor," Newsom said Monday in a post on X. "This is a day I hoped I would never see in America. I don't care if you're a Democrat or a Republican this is a line we cannot cross as a nation — this is an unmistakable step toward authoritarianism." Meanwhile, Homan appeared to soften his original statement, saying an arrest would only happen if a crime were committed by Newsom and Bass. "Well, that whole thing's been taken out of context," Homan said. "They haven't crossed a line yet, but like any other U.S. citizen, if you cross that line, I don't care who they are. The governor, the mayor, whatever — when you commit a crime against ICE officers, we will seek prosecution." Newsom, who was first elected governor in 2018 and was re-elected in 2022, has drawn the ire of Trump for how he's handled multiple issues in his state, including the wildfires that ravaged Los Angeles in January. The two have sparred over Trump's decision to deploy thousands of National Guard troops and 700 Marines to California after protests launched Friday in response to recent arrests in the city by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. While Trump has argued the National Guard troops are necessary to prevent destruction in Los Angeles, Newsom has said the deployment violated California's state sovereignty. State governors usually oversee National Guard troops, but Trump invoked a law to place the troops under federal command so he could circumvent Newsom. On Monday, Newsom said most of the troops "are sitting, unused, in federal buildings without orders." "This isn't about public safety," Newsom said in a Monday post on X. "It's about stroking a dangerous President's ego."


Bloomberg
32 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
US, Mexico Near Deal to Cut Steel Duties and Cap Imports
The US and Mexico are closing in on a deal that would remove President Donald Trump's 50% tariffs on steel imports up to a certain volume, according to people familiar with the matter, a revamp of a similar deal between the trade partners during his first term. Trump hasn't been directly involved in the negotiations and would need to sign off on any deal. The talks are being led by Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, according to the people, who asked not to be identified as the discussions are private. (Source: Bloomberg)

Associated Press
34 minutes ago
- Associated Press
In his own words: Trump said during 2024 campaign he would use military for immigration enforcement
President Donald Trump in recent days has sent thousands of National Guard troops and 700 active duty Marines to quell Los Angeles-area protests over immigration enforcement actions, despite the objections of Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom and local leaders. Those troops soon could also be supporting immigration enforcement operations, including by holding secure perimeters around areas where raids are taking place and securing streets for immigration agents. That's according to Paul Eck, deputy general counsel in the California Military Department, who said in a court filing that the agency was informed the Pentagon plans to direct the California National Guard to start providing such support. Those actions would be in line with what Trump pledged during last year's campaign, when as a candidate he promised the largest mass deportation effort the U.S. has seen, and said he would be willing to use military might to make it happen. But Trump has changed his position since his 2020 presidential bid, namely around using the Insurrection Act to send military units to respond to unrest in the states. Here's a look at how Trump has talked about use of the military when it comes to immigration — and how his position evolved — in his own words: 2025: 'If there's an insurrection, I would certainly invoke it' 'If there's an insurrection, I would certainly invoke it. We'll see. But I can tell you last night was terrible, and the night before that was terrible.' — Trump, Tuesday, to reporters in the Oval Office. ___ During an Oval Office engagement with reporters, Trump left open the possibility of invoking one of the most extreme emergency powers available to a U.S. president. The Insurrection Act authorizes the president to deploy military forces inside the United States to suppress rebellion or domestic violence or to enforce the law in certain situations. It is often referred to as the 'Insurrection Act of 1807,' but the law is actually an amalgamation of different statutes enacted by Congress between 1792 and 1871. In calling up National Guard forces over Newsom's objections, Trump cited a legal provision that allows him to mobilize federal service members when there is 'a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States.' 2024: 'I would have no problem using the military' 'If I thought things were getting out of control, I would have no problem using the military, per se. We have to have safety in our country. We have to have law and order in our country. And whichever gets us there, but I think the National Guard will do the job.' — Trump, April 30, 2024, interview with Time Magazine. ___ While campaigning in 2024, Trump said he would use the National Guard as part of efforts to deport millions of migrants across the country. He didn't say how he would carry out the operations and what role the National Guard would play, but added he would resort to the military if 'things were getting out of control.' When asked to clarify if he would use the military inland, he said, 'I don't think I'd have to do that. I think the National Guard would be able to do that. If they weren't able to, then I'd use the military.' Trump told Time that he would deport between 15 million and 20 million people who are in the country illegally. The foreign-born population, including immigrants in the country both legally and illegally, was estimated to be 46.2 million, or nearly 14% of the U.S. total, in 2022, according to the Census Bureau, which also reported about 11 million immigrants in the country illegally. After winning the November election, the possible contours of Trump's incoming administration and how it would handle issues, including immigration, began to take greater shape. On Nov. 17, after conservative activist Tom Fitton proclaimed in a social media post that the incoming president 'will declare a national emergency and will use military assets to reverse the Biden invasion through a mass deportation program,' Trump replied: 'TRUE!!!' On his first day back in office, Trump rolled out a blueprint to beef up security at the southern border in a series of executive orders that began taking effect soon after his Jan. 20 inauguration. Trump ordered the government, with Defense Department assistance, to 'finish' construction of the border wall and send troops to the border. He did not say how many would go — leaving it up to the defense secretary — or what their exact role would be. His executive orders suggested the military would help the Department of Homeland Security with 'detention space, transportation (including aircraft), and other logistics services.' Trump directed the defense secretary to come up with a plan to 'seal the borders' and repel 'unlawful mass migration.' 2020: 'There's no reason to ever' make insurrection determination 'We have to go by the laws. We can't move in the National Guard. I can call insurrection, but there's no reason to ever do that.' — Trump, Sept. 15, 2020, in a town hall hosted by ABC News in Philadelphia. ___ Questioned during a 2020 election town hall about his campaign promise of restoring law and order, Trump said he could not activate the National Guard unless a governor requested it, referring to the response to wildfires that ravaged Portland in 2020. 'We have laws. We have to go by the laws. We can't move in the National Guard. I can call insurrection, but there's no reason to ever do that,' he said. 'Even in a Portland case, we can't call in the National Guard unless we're requested by a governor. If a governor or a mayor is a Democrat, like in Portland, we call them constantly.' That reference wasn't explicitly to immigration, but it was referring to Trump's willingness to overrule a state's governor and federalize National Guard resources. ___ Kinnard can be reached at