← All Cases Coverage by Bryan K. Randolph · BrynoDC

California v. Department of Education (DOE Grants 17 States)

No. 1:25-cv-10548 District · Active Active
Court
Federal Court
mad
Judge
Angel Kelley 46
Filed
Mar 6, 2025
Judge (CL)
Angel Kelley 46
Filed (CL)
Mar 6, 2025
CL Status
active

Case Overview

17 states sued the Trump administration over the termination of Department of Education grants that Congress had authorized to address the teaching shortage across the country.

BrynoDC Coverage 1 video


The Application

History

The Trump administration terminated Education Department grants that Congress had authorized to address the teaching shortage. Seventeen states challenge this executive termination as exceeding presidential authority and violating the Appropriations Clause.

The Conclusion

The case remains active with the challenged funding freeze at issue. The outcome turns on whether the termination was authorized by statute or constitutes an ultra vires exercise of executive power inconsistent with Congressional appropriations.

Federal Court TMR-dc97de2e Federal Funding Freeze Jul 16, 2026

Case Analysis

Overview

17 states sued the Trump administration over the termination of Department of Education grants that Congress had authorized to address the teaching shortage across the country.

Overview

The government appealed Judge Joun's temporary restraining order which requires the Department of Education to make available grants that they had attempted to terminate.

Issue

Whether the Executive Branch may unilaterally terminate congressionally-authorized Department of Education grants without Congressional action to address the teaching shortage.

Rule

Congress holds the power of the purse under the Appropriations Clause; the Executive may not spend funds beyond those appropriated or defund programs Congress has authorized. Executive action must comply with applicable statutes and the Administrative Procedure Act.

Analysis

The Trump administration terminated Education Department grants that Congress had authorized to address the teaching shortage. Seventeen states challenge this executive termination as exceeding presidential authority and violating the Appropriations Clause.

Conclusion

The case remains active with the challenged funding freeze at issue. The outcome turns on whether the termination was authorized by statute or constitutes an ultra vires exercise of executive power inconsistent with Congressional appropriations.

Subscribe on Substack ↗

This tracker is maintained by BrynoDC and is free because readers fund it. Support