XOXO, AGs

We’ve been saying it for years now: State officials are the guardians of our democracy. The last few weeks have proven it.

Just four weeks into President Trump’s second term, state attorneys general have stepped up on multiple fronts to defend their constituents and our system of checks and balances. In the face of federal overreach and executive branch actions that pose direct threats to the states, state officials have been a critical backstop.

Just this week, a coalition of 22 state attorneys general joined together to block the administration from implementing major cuts to research funding administered by the National Institutes of Health. They argued that the cuts violated a law that governs how new regulations are implemented and improperly went around Congress to change existing contracts. “No such power was conveyed by Congress here,” the attorneys general wrote.

Hours after their suit was filed, a federal judge in Massachusetts issued an order blocking the cuts from going into effect in those 22 states. An additional lawsuit led the same judge to block the cuts nationwide.

A few days later, another coalition of 14 state attorneys general sued the Trump administration over the creation of the Department of Government Efficiency led by Elon Musk. They argued that the administration exceeded its constitutional authority by creating the department without approval from Congress. They noted that the department had caused “widespread disruption for state and local governments” and concern from their constituents about who now has access to their sensitive information. “The sweeping authority now vested in a single unelected and unconfirmed individual is antithetical to the nation’s entire constitutional structure,” the attorneys general wrote.

And on Thursday, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro sued federal agencies, alleging that they were continuing to hold up more than $1 billion in federal funds allocated for his state — despite multiple court orders requiring those funds to be released. “The federal government has entered into a contract with the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, promising to provide billions of dollars in Congressionally-approved funding that we have committed to serious needs — like protecting public health, cutting energy costs, providing safe, clean drinking water, and creating jobs in rural communities,” Shapiro said. “With this funding freeze, the Trump Administration is breaking that contract — and it’s my job as Governor to protect Pennsylvania’s interests.”

The next four years will continue to prove how essential state officials are. We’ll be here to back them up along the way.

This Week in Democracy

• A federal judge found that the Trump administration violated a court order directing inaccessible federal funding to be released. The administration attempted to freeze all federal funding two weeks ago. Judge John J. McConnell Jr. issued a new order on Monday directing administration officials to comply with his original order. The Trump administration filed a motion seeking to allow them ignore McConnell’s orders, which an appeals court quickly denied.

  ➡️ READ: Sharing the Facts About Unlawful Attempts to Freeze Federal Funds

• The federal executive branch is continuing to take steps to drastically reshape the federal government. On Sunday, The Washington Post reported that candidates for top national security jobs were asked if they believed the Jan. 6 attack was “an inside job” or whether the 2020 presidential election was “stolen.” Two individuals told the Post that they did not answer “yes” to either question and were subsequently not hired.

  In January, the administration fired 18 independent inspectors general that oversaw the Department of Defense, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Labor, and more. On Wednesday, eight of the fired inspectors general sued, alleging that they were illegally removed from their positions.

  And on Monday, President Trump removed the director of the Office of Government Ethics.

• The White House blocked Associated Press journalists from covering Oval Office events as retaliation for the outlet’s commitment to its independent editorial standards. The White House said that it would continue to block the AP’s reporters from some events until it changed its writing style to align with the administration’s use of the phrase “Gulf of America.” “Limiting our access to the Oval Office based on the content of AP’s speech not only severely impedes the public’s access to independent news, it plainly violates the First Amendment,” said Julie Pace, the AP’s executive editor.
• The Trump administration’s Department of Government Efficiency said that it canceled nearly $900 million in research funding for the Department of Education, even though it’s Congress’s job to determine how federal funds are spent. “Without such research, student learning and development will be harmed,” the leaders of the American Educational Research Association and the Council of Professional Associations on Federal Statistics said in a statement.

  The administration claims that the cuts are to restore authority over education to states, but states already have such authority. In our new resource, you can read more about how these cuts will impact states and the shared state and federal responsibility for education.

  ➡️ READ: Sharing the Facts About State Authority and Education

State of the States

In North Carolina, a Wake County Superior Court judge rejected an effort by Judge Jefferson Griffin to invalidate more than 60,000 votes in his race for a seat on the state’s Supreme Court. After Griffin lost the race in November to Justice Allison Riggs by 734 votes, he challenged the eligibility of tens of thousands of votes.

“Today’s decisions denying Judge Griffin’s challenges of more than 65,000 ballots are a victory for North Carolina voters and the rule of law,” Riggs said in a statement. “Voters decide elections, and I remain committed to seeing this fight through and upholding North Carolinians’ constitutional freedoms.”

Griffin appealed the decision to the state’s Court of Appeals, but the State Board of Elections has indicated it will file a “bypass petition” requesting the state’s Supreme Court to take up the appeal instead.