Latest news with #AppropriationsClause
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
NCLA Asks Sixth Circuit to Revive Suit Over Dept. of Education's Illegal Student Loan Payment Pause
Mackinac Center for Public Policy v. U.S. Department of Education; Sec'y of Education Linda McMahon, in her official capacity; and James Bergeron, Chief Operating Officer of Federal Student Aid, in his official capacity Washington, DC, June 06, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The New Civil Liberties Alliance filed an opening brief today asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit to reverse a district court's dismissal, for lack of standing, of our Mackinac Center for Public Policy v. Dept. of Education lawsuit against the Department's unlawfully forgiving 35 months of interest on student loans. Without any statutory authority, the Department extended Congress's original six-month interest forgiveness and payment suspension for nearly three more years, cancelling debt in violation of the Constitution's Appropriations Clause at a cost of at least $175 billion to taxpayers, harming the Mackinac Center in the process. This scheme injures public-service employers like Mackinac by reducing the financial incentives for (potential) employees to participate in the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program. The Sixth Circuit should decide Mackinac does have standing and require the district court to hear the case on the merits against the Department's unlawful policy. Established by Congress, the PSLF program allows employees to have their student-loan debt forgiven after ten years of work with one or more public-service employers. When the Department excused debtors from paying interest on their loans, it decreased—dollar for dollar—the wage subsidy the program promised to public-service employers like the Mackinac Center, making it more expensive for them to keep compensating their PSLF employees at the same level. The economic harm caused by the Department's unlawfully excusing student-loan debtors from honoring their obligations is enough, on its own, to require the government to answer for its actions in court. But in addition to that, the Department's lawless decisions also skewed the labor market in a way that frustrates the congressionally-designed PSLF program, increases the cost for the Mackinac Center to compete for college-educated employees, and costs taxpayers billions. The Department caused these injuries, and now the Court of Appeals should make sure it must answer for them. NCLA released the following statements: 'Governmental agencies cannot blithely ignore the law without expecting to answer for the harm their unlawful actions cause organizations like the Mackinac Center. We trust the Court of Appeals will make that clear to the Department of Education.'— Daniel Kelly, Senior Litigation Counsel, NCLA 'The Department of Education under Secretary McMahon should settle this case. What possible reason does it have to keep defending the lawless regime instituted by former Secretary Miguel Cardona and Richard Cordray to forgive student-loan debt—or in this case interest on that debt—without authority from Congress?'— Mark Chenoweth, President, NCLA For more information visit the case page here. ABOUT NCLA NCLA is a nonpartisan, nonprofit civil rights group founded by prominent legal scholar Philip Hamburger to protect constitutional freedoms from violations by the Administrative State. NCLA's public-interest litigation and other pro bono advocacy strive to tame the unlawful power of state and federal agencies and to foster a new civil liberties movement that will help restore Americans' fundamental rights. ### CONTACT: Joe Martyak New Civil Liberties Alliance 703-403-1111 in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
26-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Washington challenges federal order restricting K-12 funds for 'illegal DEI practices'
Apr. 25—Washington has joined 18 other states to challenge a directive by the Trump administration that warned state education agencies could lose funding if they have diversity, equity and inclusion programs. The lawsuit was filed Friday in a federal court in Massachusetts. In an April 3 letter, the Department of Education gave education officials across the country 10 days to affirm they are not using diversity, equity and inclusion programs to favor any one race above another. In a statement announcing the letter, acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Craig Trainor said, "Federal financial assistance is a privilege, not a right." "When state education commissioners accept federal funds, they agree to abide by federal antidiscrimination requirements," Trainor said. The letter cites the 2023 U.S. Supreme Court case Students for Fair Admissions V. Harvard as the basis for the department's request. The decision struck down affirmative action, determining universities that collect federal funding can't use race as a factor in admissions. At least two federal judges have blocked the order from taking effect. "A complete education depends on students learning in a safe and inclusive environment," Washington Attorney General Nick Brown said in a statement Friday. "Washington state's policies put students first, and I will not let the Trump administration roll that back." According to the Washington State Attorney General's Office, the federal government provides the state with $1.4 billion a year through congressionally appropriated funds for various programs. The lawsuit alleges the directive violates the Spending Clause, the Appropriations Clause, the Administrative Procedures Act and the separation of powers. According to the Attorney General's Office, states could still face "liability for failing to fully comply with the vague and ill-defined federal order" even if they signed it. Following the letter, Chris Reykdal, the state superintendent of public instruction, told the 295 school districts in Washington not to take action, saying the office is working to "understand the legality of the directive and our next steps," which echoed his past guidance that school districts shouldn't comply with federal directives that contradict state law. "It is (the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction's) position that Washington (local education agencies), in alignment with our state and federal laws, are already in compliance with Title VI. OSPI has previously submitted the required assurances that our state will comply with federal law," Reykdal wrote in an email to school districts. In February, the federal department issued a "Dear colleague" letter to schools that they should cut DEI programs or risk federal funds, which Reykdal told Washington schools to ignore. Friday's lawsuit is at least the 12th Washington has filed against the Trump administration.
Yahoo
25-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Mass. AG Campbell sues Trump over Dept. of Education threat to hold funding over DEI
Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea J. Campbell sued the Trump administration over the U.S. Department of Education's threat to not fund state and local education agencies that do not shut down diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs. As part of a coalition of 19 attorneys general, the lawsuit filed Friday seeks to stop the Trump administration from withholding any funding based on 'unlawful conditions,' Campbell's office said in a statement. 'Diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives are legal efforts that help students feel safe, supported and respected,' Campbell said in the statement. 'The Trump administration's threats to withhold critical education funding due to the use of these initiatives are not only unlawful, but harmful to our children, families, and schools.' The lawsuit stated that the attempt to end education funding over the administration's interpretation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 violates the Spending Clause, the Appropriations Clause, the separation of powers and the Administrative Procedures Act. Massachusetts annually receives almost $575.2 million in congressionally mandated financial support from the department, including almost $302.4 million in funding under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. To receive funding, state and local education agencies must comply with Title VI, which prohibits discrimination based on race, color or national origin. While Massachusetts and other states said they would comply with federal nondiscrimination statutes, regulations, and case law, the Trump administration's interpretation of Title VI is 'vague, contradictory and unsupported,' the attorney general said. On April 3, the department told state and local agencies that they had to sign a document that would allow the White House's interpretation of Title VI or risk 'immediate and catastrophic loss of federal education funds,' Campbell's office said. State and local agencies could choose not to certify the department's 'undefined viewpoint on what constitutes unlawful diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, curriculum, instruction, and policies, and place federal funding in peril,' Campbell's office said. Read More: Mass. schools boss defies Trump DEI edict: State will 'continue to promote diversity' The alternative is to identify DEI as a detriment to students and still risk not being liable for not going along with the department's order. 'By filing this lawsuit, we seek to block any such reckless disruptions to our children's education, and as attorney general and a mom, I will continue to hold the Administration accountable for illegal actions that harm our state,' Campbell said in the statement. The coalition is made up of attorneys general from California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin. 'Kids with special needs who require [Individualized Education Programs], kids who need to learn English as a second language, kids in foster homes, and more depend on these programs,' Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha said in a statement. '...By conditioning this funding in an illegal and thoughtless way, the administration will cause irreversible harm to children in our state. This attack is unacceptable, and we will do everything we can to stop it.' 'Let me be clear: the federal Department of Education is not trying to 'combat' discrimination with this latest order,' California Attorney General Rob Bonta said in a statement. 'Instead, it is using our nation's foundational civil rights law as a pretext to coerce states into abandoning efforts to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion through lawful programs and policies.' 'Games of chicken': Trump reversing foreign student legal status raises concerns Poll reveals divide between Gen Z and older Americans on finances and economy Trump offers rare rebuke to leader he has previously called a genius Trump calls on AG to investigate major Democratic fundraising platform Trump's $2.2B funding freeze for Harvard would hit cancer research, battlefield medicine and more
Yahoo
18-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
U.S.-Funded News Organizations Defy Trump and Continue Reporting
Multiple U.S.-funded news organizations worldwide continue to operate in the face of cuts and purges from the Trump administration. Last week, President Trump signed an executive order to destroy the U.S. Agency for Global Media. The next day, virtually the entire staff at Voice of America was fired, as they are considered federal employees. But other international broadcasters funded by the United States operate as nonprofits that rely on federal grants—and they're fighting back. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio Free Asia, and Middle East Broadcasting Networks are all continuing reporting while they prepare for legal challenges to Trump's order, which they believe is 'unlawful.' 'Our pro bono legal team is prepared to take all necessary steps to ensure that RFE/RL continues its Congressionally authorized mission,' wrote Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty Board Chair Lisa Curtis on LinkedIn. She continued: Here are four reasons it's illegal for USAGM to deny appropriated funds to RFE/ violates the statute governing RFE/RL. 1. It violates the statute governing RFE/RL. 2. It violates Congressional appropriations laws. 3. It violates the U.S. Constitution. The Appropriations Clause and the Take Care Clause of the Constitution, and the Impoundment Control Act, cannot be ignored. Justice Kavanaugh agrees and said so in his Aiken County decision in 2013. 4. Finally the grant termination itself is unlawful. Leaders of the outlets said programming is set to continue until further notice.
Yahoo
11-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Fact Check: No evidence Elizabeth Warren said Americans had no right to see how tax money is spent
Claim: U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren said: "There is nothing in the constitution that says ordinary Americans have a right to see what we are spending tax dollars on." Rating: In February 2025, a rumor spread that U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren had said Americans did not have the right to see how their tax money was being spent. The full quote purportedly attributed to Warren read: "There is nothing in the Constitution that says ordinary Americans have a right to see what we're spending tax dollars on." Users on X (archived), Facebook (archived, archived) and Instagram said the Massachusetts Democrat made the comment on Jan. 30, 2025. One user captioned the quote: "Scary quote of the day." (X user @nettermike) Snopes readers also sent us examples of the rumor, including the meme below, and asked whether it was true. There was no evidence that Warren said these words. A review of her personal and senatorial X accounts found no results for the words "constitution," "tax" and "dollars." Similarly, no results for the same search term turned up on two Facebook accounts officially affiliated with the senator. The U.S. Senate website similarly had no record of the phrase, nor did Warren's own website. A Google search of the quote turned up no results besides the social media posts claiming she had said it. No credible news outlets reported that Warren said the words. Additionally, a spokesperson from Warren's office told us via email that the quote was fake. For these reasons, we rated this claim as misattributed. Government provision of "a regular statement" of "expenditures of all public money," as mentioned in the above meme sent in by a Snopes reader, is a legitimate part of the U.S. Constitution. Article 1, Section 9, Clause 7 reads in part: "a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time." "Elizabeth Warren." Accessed 11 Feb. 2025. "Elizabeth Warren Made a Statement Suggesting That..." Instagram, 8 Feb. 2020, Accessed 11 Feb. 2025. Hoskins, Steve. "U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren January 30, 2025..." 9 Feb. 2025, Accessed 11 Feb. 2025. Netter, Mike. " X (Formerly Twitter), 7 Feb. 2025, Accessed 11 Feb. 2025. "Overview of Appropriations Clause | Constitution Annotated | | Library of Congress." Accessed 11 Feb. 2025. "U.S. Senate." Accessed 11 Feb. 2025. "U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren." Accessed 11 Feb. 2025. Warren, Elizabeth. "Home | U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts." Accessed 11 Feb. 2025.
