Judge blocks EPA from canceling $20 billion in Biden era grants
March 19 (UPI) -- A federal judge ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency can't cancel climate grants issued during the Biden administration, but the grantees cannot access the money either.
The decision by U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan stopped the EPA from canceling the distribution of $20 billion that it had deposited in a Citibank account for nonprofits, including Climate United, Coalition for Green Capital and Power Forward Communities.
Chutkan wrote that the EPA grant termination letters only "vaguely reference 'multiple ongoing investigations' into 'programmatic waste, fraud, and abuse and conflicts of interest' but offer no specific information about such investigations, factual support for the decision, or an individualized explanation," and that "this is insufficient."
The grants were issued under the Inflation Reduction Act, which passed Congress and was signed into law in 2022. The Act authorized the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, which made grants available to eligible climate projects.
Among the grantees were nonprofits Climate United, Coalition for Green Capital and Power Forward Communities, who are the plaintiffs in Chutkan's decision. The three nonprofits were granted an approximate total of $14 billion, and that money is held by Citibank; five other nonprofit groups were the recipients of the remainder of the $20 billion total.
The EPA issued a letter to the plaintiffs on March 11 that terminated the grants, leading them to move for temporary restraining orders to prevent Citibank from not "violating its legal and contractual obligations to disburse grant money owed" to the plaintiffs and stop the EPA from terminating the grants.
However, Chutkan's court order also states that as this is a temporary order.
"The court merely orders the parties to preserve the status quo -- that is, for Citibank to maintain the grant funds in Plaintiffs' respective accounts," it said.
This means that while the grant money has not been given back to the government, maintaining the "status quo" will also keep the grants from being withdrawn for use by the nonprofits.
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin posted a statement to X Tuesday that confirmed the grants are "frozen by court order."
Zeldin also said that the EPA under the Biden presidency was "riddled with self-dealing and wasteful spending," and that he "will not rest" until the grant money has been returned to the U.S. Treasury.
Meanwhile, as the grants remain locked to all parties involved, Climate United could end up "furloughing or laying off staff," among other "imminent harms" the company declared in the suit could happen without the expected grant funding. In a press release, Climate United stated Tuesday it "will continue its legal process to fully restore its program."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
US Army to bring back names of 7 bases that once honored Confederate leaders
The US Army said Tuesday it will restore the names of seven Army bases that previously honored Confederate leaders. 'We are also going to be restoring the names to Fort Pickett, Fort Hood, Fort Gordon, Fort Rucker, Fort Polk, Fort A.P. Hill, and Fort Robert E. Lee,' President Donald Trump announced on Tuesday at Fort Bragg, which was briefly known as Fort Liberty until the administration changed it back earlier this year. 'We won a lot of battles out of those forts. It's no time to change.' The Army plans to give the bases new namesakes honoring 'heroic Soldiers who served in conflicts ranging from the Civil War to the Battle of Mogadishu,' according to a news release, as it rolls back the Biden-era name changes. Reverting the base names to the original Confederate namesakes would require congressional approval. The move comes after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, a National Guard veteran and former longtime Fox News host, moved quickly to roll back name changes at other Army bases, such as Fort Bragg and Fort Benning. Hegseth also ordered the secretary of the Navy to rename the oiler ship USNS Harvey Milk, which had honored the gay rights activist and Navy veteran who was made to resign from the force because of his sexual orientation. Removing Confederate monikers from US military bases became a contentious political issue in the final months of Trump's first term. While Trump vetoed the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act that included a naming commission to study and recommend new titles for bases named after Confederate leaders, Congress voted to override his veto with overwhelming bipartisan support. The Department of Defense began implementing the naming commission's recommendations in 2023. Here are the names that are being brought back. According to the Army's Tuesday announcement, Fort Barfoot, a Virginia base previously named after Confederate General George Pickett, will be named in honor of 1st Lt. Vernon W. Pickett, a soldier who received the Distinguished Service Cross for his heroism during World War II. While pinned down by enemy machine gun fire, Pickett crawled forward and destroyed two enemy positions with grenades, the Army said. He escaped from a transport train after being captured, rejoined his unit and was later killed in action. Fort Cavazos in Texas will be renamed Fort Hood in honor of Distinguished Service Cross recipient Col. Robert B. Hood, who fought in World War I. In 2023, it was named after Gen. Richard Cavazos, who served in both the Korean War and Vietnam War. He was the first Hispanic four-star general in US history. Georgia's Fort Eisenhower will revert back to Fort Gordon, this time honoring Medal of Honor recipient Master Sgt. Gary I. Gordon, who during the 1993 Battle of Mogadishu, Somalia, defended wounded crew members at a helicopter crash site. The base, which was previously named after Confederate General John Gordon, was renamed Fort Eisenhower after General of the Army Dwight Eisenhower, who went on to serve as the nation's 34th president. A Virginia fort once named for Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee will carry the namesake of Pvt. Fitz Lee, who received the Medal of Honor for his service during the Spanish-American War. The fort was renamed Fort Gregg-Adams after Lt. Gen. Arthur Gregg and Lt. Col Charity Adams in 2023. Gregg helped desegregate the Army, including at Fort Lee, while Adams, in 1944, 'was selected to command the first unit of African-American women to serve overseas,' according to the congressional naming commission. Her service was chronicled in the 2024 film 'The Six Triple Eight.' Gen. James H. Polk, a Silver Star recipient and commanding officer of the 3rd Cavalry Group in operations across Europe during World War II, will become the new namesake for Louisiana's Fort Johnson, according to the release. The fort had been renamed in honor of Sgt. William Henry Johnson, a Black soldier who was considered one of the first heroes of World War I after he fought off about two dozen Germans alone, killing at least four. Fort Novosel will be redesignated as Fort Rucker, in honor of Capt. Edward W. Rucker, a Distinguished Service Cross recipient and aviator that flew behind enemy lines in World War I 'in a daring aerial battle over France, disrupting enemy movements and completing their mission against overwhelming odds,' according to the release. It was previously renamed after Chief Warrant Officer 4 Michael J. Novosel Sr., who served in World War II, the Korean War and the Vietnam War, where he flew 2,543 medical evacuation missions. The Army will bring back the Fort A.P. Hill name to Fort Walker, this time honoring Lt. Col. Edward Hill, 1st Sgt. Robert A. Pinn and Pvt. Bruce Anderson, three soldiers who fought for the Union during the Civil War. The Virginia fort previously was named in honor of Lt. Gen. Ambrose Powell (A.P.) Hill, a Confederate commander. It was renamed Fort Walker in 2023, after Dr. Mary Walker, the Army's first female surgeon who was ultimately awarded the Medal of Honor for her service during the Civil War. CNN's Samantha Waldenberg, Oren Liebermann, Devan Cole, Barbara Starr and Ellie Kaufman contributed to this report.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
House Republicans tee up tweaks to Trump megabill
House Republican leaders on Tuesday teed up changes to the 'big, beautiful bill' of President Trump's tax cut and spending priorities that are slated to come up for a vote of the full chamber this week. The tweaks come after the Senate parliamentarian reviewed the sprawling package and identified provisions that do not comply with the upper chamber's procedural requirements for using the budget reconciliation process, which allows Republicans to circumvent a Democratic filibuster and approve the legislation by simple majority. Leaving the language in the bill risks losing the ability to pass the bill under budget reconciliation. The parliamentarian's process is known as the 'Byrd bath.' The adjustments impacted a number of policy areas including defense funding, energy policy and changes to Medicaid. On the defense front, House GOP leaders are nixing $2 billion for the enhancement of military intelligence programs; $500 million for the development, procurement and integration of maritime mines; and $62 million to convert Ohio-class submarine tubes to accept additional missiles. The changes also removed a provision that would have reinstated leases for a proposed copper and nickel mine that had been renewed under the first Trump administration but revoked under Biden. The mine would have been located near an area known as the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness, a nature preserve that contains canoe routes and species including black bears, moose and foxes. One House Republican described the lower chamber's tweaks as preventing 'fatalities' from remaining in the bill when it hits the Senate. 'There are a small number, I mean, could count them on one hand, of fatalities that have been identified by the parliamentarian,' the GOP lawmaker said. 'Of course we can't transmit the bill with fatalities so those fatalities will be cured through a rule this week.' While the lower chamber is planning to strip those terms from the bill, party leaders are not giving up on the policy: House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) said Senate Republicans will fight for the provisions when the bill hits the floor. 'We disagree; ultimately we're going to try it again on the Senate floor,' Scalise told reporters. 'We disagree with the parliamentarian. … But you can't take the risk on any of them. You cannot take the risk because if any one of them is ruled on the Senate floor to be fatal, it's a 60-vote bill. The whole bill is a 60-vote bill — you can't take that risk.' The full House will vote on approving those changes this week, with the adjustments tacked on to a 'rule' resolution — a procedural measure that governs debate for legislation. The rule making the fixes to the megabill will also tee up the terms of debate for unrelated legislation to claw back $9.4 billion in funding for foreign aid and public broadcasting. It advanced out of the Rules Committee on a party-line, 8-4 vote Tuesday evening. Rule resolutions are typically passed along party lines and are tests of party loyalty, but Republicans sometimes buck leadership and vote against the procedural rules in protest of process or policy. Rep. Thomas Massie (Ky.) — one of two House Republicans who voted 'no' on the bill when it passed the House last month — voiced his disapproval of making the changes to the bill via a rule in a post on the social platform X. 'Nancy Pelosi once said the House needed to vote for a bill to find out what was in it. Today @SpeakerJohnson said 'hold my beer.' He just announced he's using the Rules Committee to change the text of the Big Beautiful Bill a week after we voted on it!' Massie said. While House Republicans have already passed the bill in the lower chamber, they have not officially transmitted it to the Senate — enabling them to make the fixes via the rule mechanism. Republicans are using the budget reconciliation process to push the megabill through Congress while avoiding the Senate's 60-vote cloture rule, enabling them to pass the bill on party lines without support from Democrats. The tweaks in the House come as party leaders are holding out hope that they can enact the package by July 4, which was their self-imposed deadline. Trump, however, opened the door to the process blowing past that timeline, saying if it 'takes a little longer, that's OK.' Updated at 8:33 p.m. EDT. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Biden's COVID czar hammers RFK Jr. over vaccine panel overhaul
Former White House COVID-19 response coordinator Ashish Jha, who served under former President Biden, criticized the decision by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to fire all 17 experts on the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) vaccine panel. Kennedy announced the decision in an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal on Monday, saying, 'A clean sweep is needed to re-establish public confidence in vaccine science.' But in an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer, Jha pushed back against Kennedy's reasoning. 'Look, what he said in his op-ed was a series of nonsense about a group of individuals, experts …who shape what vaccines, if any, are going to be available to the American people,' Jha said in the interview. 'So obviously this is very concerning,' he continued. 'We'll have to see who he appoints next. But this is a step in the wrong direction.' Jha said he is concerned about what the move foretells about the secretary's agenda on vaccines. Jha pointed to what he characterized as a lackluster response from the secretary to 'the worst measles outbreak of the last 25 years.' He also expressed concern regarding Kennedy's raising questions about vaccines causing autism, which Jha dismissed and said was 'settled science.' 'Then you put this in the middle of all of that,' Jha said, referring to the vaccine panel sweep, 'and what you have is a pretty clear picture that what Secretary Kennedy is trying to do is make sure that vaccines are not readily available to Americans, not just for kids, for the elderly.' 'He could go pretty far with this move, and I really am worried about where we're headed,' Jha continued. He said he's particularly concerned about the effect Kennedy's move will have on kids and whether they will continue having access to certain vaccines in the future. 'Kids rely on vaccines. I'm worried about whether the next generation of kids are going to have access to polio vaccines and measles vaccines. That's where we're heading. That's what we have to push back against.' Kennedy said in his op-ed that he was removing every member of the panel to give the Trump administration an opportunity to appoint its own members. Kennedy has long accused members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of having conflicts of interest, sparking concern among vaccine advocates that he would seek to install members who are far more skeptical of approving new vaccines. But Jha pushed back against criticism that the panel was all Biden-appointed experts, saying, 'When the Biden administration came in, almost all of the appointees had come from the first Trump administration.' 'That was fine because they were good people,' he said. 'They were experts. Right now, it's the same thing. The people he is firing are experts — like a nurse in Illinois who spent her entire career getting kids vaccinated, cancer doctors from Memorial Sloan Kettering — like these are really good people.' 'And generally, CDC has not worried about when were they appointed. The question is, are they good and are they conflict free.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
