The Dictatorship
Trump keeps losing in court. But the relief isn’t always what it seems and might not last.
Looking back on President Donald Trump’s first 100 daysNBC News has reported that his administration has faced more than 200 civil lawsuits to date — and that these lawsuits have been largely successful, with judges across the country ordering more than 100 injunctions or pauses.
Usually, I am a glass half-full kind of girl. But lately, there have been signs that many of these injunctions are not actually stopping or preventing the actions at issue.
First, even putting aside perhaps the two most glaring examples of the Trump administration’s failure to follow court orders — the cases of Kilmar Abrego Garcia and those Venezuelan men deported and imprisoned in El Salvador pursuant to Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act — there are multiple other litigations in which the administration has skirted, if not outright flouted, compliance.
In late March, for example, a Massachusetts federal judge issued a temporary restraining order forbidding the Department of Homeland Security from deporting any immigrant with a final removal order to a third country (meaning a destination other than the country designated during immigration proceedings) “UNLESS and UNTIL Defendants [the administration] provide that individual, and their respective immigration counsel, if any, with written notice of the third country to where they may be” deported and a “meaningful opportunity” to seek protection against torture. Yet through a sworn declarationa regional immigration official has now admitted, after lawyers for individual men reported that their Venezuelan clients were nonetheless deported to El Salvador, that at least four Venezuelans were deported to El Salvador after the temporary restraining order was entered. Stillthe administration insisted that it hadn’t violated the orderbecause all four were first transferred to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and then flown to El Salvador on flights operated by the Defense Department, which is not a defendant in the lawsuit, and without any Homeland Security personnel on board.
And it isn’t just the immigration context in which the administration is giving court orders a wink and a nod.
And it isn’t just the immigration context in which the administration is giving court orders a wink and a nod. Consider the administration’s efforts to dismantle the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau through massive reductions in force, among other maneuvers, which a federal district court judge in Washington broadly forbid in late March. But then, an appeals court added an exception: The administration could terminate employees if, after a “particularized assessment,” such employees were determined to be “unnecessary to the performance of defendants’ [the CFPB’s] statutory duties.” Within a week, and without any proof that such assessments had taken place, the agency issued “reduction in force” notices to more than 1,400 employees, or more than 80% of its workforce.
To the original district court judge, the CFPB’s action triggered “significant grounds for concern” that the administration had not complied with court orders, and by Monday night, the appeals court all but agreedreinstating the entire injunction while the administration appeals. But can the damage be reversed? After all, internal documents and communications filed in the litigation reflect the panic and chaos that has ruled the agency for months.
But the Trump administration’s noncompliance isn’t the only barrier to meaningful courtroom victories — and for some litigants, it’s not even the most significant one.
One lawyer involved in states’ lawsuits against Trump policy initiatives and funding freezes, who requested anonymity out of fear of retribution, explained that in the cases they are litigating, the administration has largely complied with court orders. And while there have been occasional hiccups along the way, as when a funding stream that a court ordered to be restored was not turned back on, the lawyer said the Justice Department has helped resolve those issues.
On the other hand, the Supreme Court itself has become an obstacle for litigating states.
On the other hand, the Supreme Court itself has become an obstacle for litigating states. Specifically, that lawyer noted that since the high court ruled that challenges to grant terminations are essentially contract disputes over money damages between the U.S. and grant recipients, such cases must be brought in a specialized federal court, the Court of Federal Claims, where relief — much less immediate reinstatement of federal grants — could be harder to come by.
Further, the lawyer reminded me that in May, the justices will hear oral arguments on the administration’s bid to limit the impact of nationwide injunctions against Trump’s attempt to end birthright citizenship to the three judicial districts where those court orders were issued. Put another way, if those injunctions are effective only in those three districts, the birthright citizenship case would not only restore Trump’s executive order across most of the country, but it could also effectively end district courts’ ability to issue nationwide injunctions. That would mean plaintiffs seeking to prevent any of Trump’s executive orders from fully taking effect would have to file and win lawsuits in each and every one of the 94 federal district courts in the country to obtain the kind of relief a single court can render now.
And finally, the nature of the federal budgeting and appropriations process means that court challenges to funding freezes and revocations might soon present diminishing returns. After all, if a presidential administration suddenly cuts off congressionally appropriated funding or guts an agency created and maintained by statute, that arguably is an unconstitutional act as well as a violation of multiple statutes, both specific to that agency and governing administrative procedures generally. But what if, for the coming fiscal year, Congress implements Trump’s priorities by zeroing out funding for agency-run grant programs, medical and scientific research, and even federal employee compensation? That would likely fall into the category of what one law professor I know calls “awful but lawful.”
None of this means courts have been or will be useless in upholding the rule of law. But increasingly, my friend Steve Vladeck’s warning has become my mantra: “The courts alone can’t save us.”
Lisa Rubin is an BLN legal correspondent and a former litigator. Previously, she was the off-air legal analyst for “The Rachel Maddow Show” and “Alex Wagner Tonight.”
WASHINGTON (AP) — Vice President JD Vance announced Wednesday that the Trump administration would “temporarily halt” some Medicaid funding to the state of Minnesota over fraud concernsas part of what he described as an aggressive crackdown on misuse of public funds.
Vance, who made the announcement with Dr. Mehmet Oz, the administrator for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said the administration was taking the action “in order to ensure that the state of Minnesota takes its obligations seriously to be good stewards of the American people’s tax money.”
Oz, who referred to people committing fraud as “self-serving scoundrels,” said the federal government would hold off on paying $259.5 million to Minnesota in funding for Medicaid, the health care safety net for low-income Americans.
“This is not a problem with the people of Minnesota, it’s a problem with the leadership of Minnesota and other states who do not take Medicaid preservation seriously,” Oz said.
Wednesday’s move is part of a larger Trump administration effort to spotlight fraud around the country. That effort comes after allegations of fraud involving day care centers run by Somali residents in Minneapolis prompted a massive immigration crackdown in the Midwestern city, resulting in widespread protests. President Donald Trump, in his State of the Union address on Tuesday, announced Vance would spearhead a national “war on fraud.”
Trump also recently nominated Colin McDonald to serve as the first assistant attorney general in charge of a Justice Department division dedicated to rooting out fraud.
Minnesota pushes back
Oz said the administration was simultaneously notifying Minnesota’s Democratic Gov. Tim Walz as he was making the announcement publicly.
“We will give them the money, but we’re going to hold it and only release it after they propose and act on a comprehensive corrective action plan to solve the problem,” Oz said.
He said Walz would have 60 days to respond and advised health care providers and Medicaid beneficiaries who were concerned to contact Walz’s office.
Walz, former Vice President Kamala Harris’ 2024 running mate, said in a pair of social media posts that the administration’s move had nothing to do with fraud.
“This is a campaign of retribution. Trump is weaponizing the entirety of the federal government to punish blue states like Minnesota,” Walz said. “These cuts will be devastating for veterans, families with young kids, folks with disabilities, and working people across our state.”
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison said in a statement that his team has secured over 300 Medicaid fraud convictions since he took office in 2019. And he noted that he called on the Legislature earlier Wednesday to give him more staff and new legal tools to combat Medicaid fraud.
“Courts have repeatedly found that their pattern of cutting first and asking questions later is illegal, and if the federal government is unlawfully withholding money meant for the 1.2 million low-income Minnesotans on Medicaid, we will see them in court,” Ellison said.
Oz said the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services were also taking action to crack down on fraud in Medicare, the health care system relied upon by millions of older adults.
He said CMS for six months would block any new Medicare enrollments for suppliers of durable medical equipment, prosthetics, orthotics or other supplies used to treat chronic conditions or assist in injury recovery.
The Office of the Inspector General for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services found last year that Medicare improperly paid suppliers nearly $23 million for durable medical equipment from 2018 through 2024. But it found that most of that was before January 2020, when changes to the system were implemented.
Oz also announced a new crowdsourcing effort he said would help “crush fraud” by soliciting Americans’ tips and suggestions.
“All of us are smarter than any one of us,” he said.
In a news release accompanying the announcement, CMS said the funding being paused in Minnesota included some $244 million in unsupported or potentially fraudulent Medicaid claims and about $15 million in claims involving “individuals lacking a satisfactory immigration status.”
Immigrants who are not living in the U.S. legally, as well as some lawfully present immigrants, are not allowed to enroll in the Medicaid program that provides nearly-free coverage for health services.
CMS said in the release that if Minnesota fails to satisfy its requirements, it may defer up to $1 billion in federal funds to the state over the next year. CMS spokesperson Catherine Howden said the agency’s review of potential fraud cases would include sampling claims to see if they comply with federal requirements, and potentially requesting more information about specific claims.
Akeiisa Coleman, the senior program officer for Medicaid at the Commonwealth Fund, said CMS was taking a “highly unusual step” in deferring funding. She said if the state doesn’t have enough funds available, it may have to halt payments to providers, which could affect care.
Democratic-run states face cutoffs
The administration has threatened to cut off funding for various programs for some Democratic-run states over fraud concerns over the last few months.
One judge blocked those actions and required that payments flowing to Minnesota and four other states — California, Colorado, Illinois and New York — for a variety of social service programs. The government had said that there was “reason to believe” that those states were granting benefits to people in the country illegally. It did not initially explain where that information came from, but a government lawyer told the judge it was largely in reaction to news reports about possible fraud.
Another judge said she would not let it cut off funding for administrative costs for 22 states that have refused to hand over information about applicants and recipients of food aid through the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program.
The latest action was prompted in part by a series of fraud cases, including a nonprofit called Feeding Our Future accused of stealing pandemic aid meant for school meals. Prosecutors have put the losses from that case at $300 million.
Since then, Trump has targeted the Somali diaspora in Minnesota with immigration enforcement actions and has made a series of disparaging comments about the community. During his State of the Union address on Tuesday, Trump said “pirates” have “ransacked Minnesota.”
Federal agencies have also been enlisted to assist in targeting fraud in Minnesota.
Last December, the U.S. Treasury Department issued an order requiring money wire services that people use to send money to Somalia to submit additional verification to the Treasury.
The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services told Minnesota in January that it intended to freeze parts of payments for some Medicaid programs that were deemed high-risk. The state said that those cuts would add up to more than $2 billion annually if they lasted and made an administrative appeal.
___
Associated Press writers Geoff Mulvihill in Philadelphia, Steve Karnowski in Minneapolis and Fatima Hussein in Washington contributed to this report.
Conservatives’ crusade against reproductive freedom is deathly serious. Two controversies over the past week highlight some of the violence undergirding the MAGA movement’s assault on the idea of people choosing when and whether to bear children.
In Tennessee, two GOP state lawmakers are gauging interest in legislation that would make people eligible for homicide charges — and potentially the death penalty — for receiving or assisting with an abortion.
The bill’s co-sponsor in the state Senate said he doesn’t think the bill currently has the votes but ultimately could. Per the WSMV television station in Nashville:
“We want to be very open and have a conversation, whether it’s controversial or not — let’s hear from all sides to see where we are as Tennessee and where we stand,”[stateSenMark[stateSenMark] Pody said. “Talking to some colleagues, we don’t have the votes to move something like that in the Senate at this moment.”
Pody said he does not consider the bill dead on arrival in the Senate, adding he believes there is a possibility for negotiation and that Republicans in the House and Senate could reach an agreement on language that could pass both chambers.
Most Americans seem to think we shouldn’t kick the tires on state-sponsored executions for abortion recipients. Pody apparently disagrees.
His fellow co-sponsor in the House, state Rep. Jody Barrett, didn’t sound any more sane in his exchanges about the bill with reporter Chris Davis from WTVF, the CBS affiliate in Nashville.
“Murder should be murder, whether it’s a person in being or a person in utero,” Barrett said.
I asked Barrett directly about the criticism that the bill unfairly targets mothers.
“I think that’s a talking point saying that you’re targeting mothers. We’re not targeting mothers. We’re targeting unborn children and trying to protect them and give them the protection under the law for you and me,” Barrett said.
The tacit admission came later:
“A simple examination of the death penalty in Tennessee would show that that’s just not realistic. Now, do I have to admit that the death penalty is a possibility? Sure. But since the death penalty was reinstated in Tennessee in 1977, there’s been less than 200 people sentenced to death, and only 16 have actually been executed — none of them women,” Barrett said.
It’s safe to say the latter remarks are probably not going to be enough to soothe concerns about this morbid proposal — one that mirrors several others across the country in the past year.
In Vermont, a different controversy is unfolding over a right-wing influencer named Hank Poitras, who was elected chairman of a county GOP committee — and who once delivered an extremely graphic diatribe about committing an act of violence on a woman’s womb after she got pregnant.
Ja’han Jones is an MS NOW opinion blogger. He previously wrote The ReidOut Blog.
The Trump administration is temporarily halting $259 million in Medicaid funding to Minnesota, Vice President JD Vance announced Wednesday.
Vance said the payments will be paused “until the state government takes its obligations seriously to stop the fraud that’s being perpetrated against the American taxpayer.”
The news of the temporary halting of the massive amount of federal funding — which provides health insurance to low-income people — comes as the state has been a target of the federal government following allegations of fraud perpetrated by child care providers in the state. In December, federal officials froze $185 million in child care funds to Minnesota, and last month, the administration announced it was freezing $10 billion in funding for social services programs in five Democratic-led states, including Minnesota.
The latest news also follows President Donald Trump’s announcement at the State of the Union address Tuesday night that he was tasking the vice president with waging a “war on fraud.”
Dr. Mehmet Oz, administrator for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said Wednesday that officials identified “scammers” who he claimed “hijacked … a certain part of the Minnesota Medicaid system.”
Federal prosecutors have confirmedthere was large-scale social services fraud in Minnesota, with dozensof people — many of whom are Somalis — having been convicted of stealing more than $1 billion in public funds intended for food, housing and services for people with disabilities. But the administration did not provide detailed evidence on Wednesday of the alleged large-scale Medicaid fraud in Minnesota that Oz claimed.
“These schemes disproportionately involve immigrant communities,” Oz said. Generally, undocumented people are not able to be enrolled in Medicaid.
Vance mentioned a program that he said claimed to offer after-school services to autistic children but did not actually do so, though he did not offer any identifying information.
Oz added that the top fraudulent biller in the state “submitted 450 days where they claim they were working more than 24 hours a day,” but also did not provide corroborating information.
According to the health policy research organization KFF, Medicaid covers nearly 1.2 millionkids and adults in Minnesota, more than half of whom are nursing home residents. More than three-quarters of Medicaid enrollees in the state are working full time, that data also shows.
Oz said the federal government will only release the funds “after they propose an act on a comprehensive corrective action plan to solve the problem,” adding that Gov. Tim Walz, D-Minn., has 60 days to do so. He suggested similar announcements to come in other states “soon,” and mentioned Florida, New York and California as potential future targets.
“This is not a problem with the people of Minnesota,” Oz said. “It’s a problem with the leadership of Minnesota and other states who do not take Medicaid preservation seriously.”
Vance added: “The main reason that we’re doing this is that we want to make sure that the people of Minnesota have access to the services that they’re entitled to.”
In a post on X on Wednesday night, Walz said the announcement “has nothing to do with fraud,” and added, “The agents Trump allegedly sent to investigate fraud are shooting protesters and arresting children. His DOJ is gutting the U.S. Attorney’s Office and crippling their ability to prosecute fraud. And every week, Trump pardons another fraudster.”
Minnesota lawmakers and the state’s attorney general, Keith Ellison, have introduced legislation that would add more than a dozen new staffers to the AG office’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit and that would strengthen state fraud laws.
In a statement provided to MS NOW, Ellison hinted the state may sue in response.
“Courts have repeatedly found that their pattern of cutting first and asking questions later is illegal, and if the federal government is unlawfully withholding money meant for the 1.2 million low-income Minnesotans on Medicaid, we will see them in court,” he said.
Shireen Gandhi, commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Human Services, which administers Medicaid, said the government’s actions “significantly harm the state’s health care infrastructure and the 1.2 million Minnesotans who depend on Medicaid,” adding that federal officials “chose to ignore more than a year of serious and intensive work to fight fraud in our state.”
Spokespeople for Sen. Tina Smith, D-Minn., and Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., did not immediately respond to MS NOW’s request for comment.
Nour Longi and Emily Hung contributed reporting.
Julianne McShane is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW who also covers the politics of abortion and reproductive rights. You can send her tips from a non-work device on Signal at jmcshane.19 or follow her on X or Bluesky.
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship6 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Uncategorized1 year ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
Politics10 months agoDemocrat challenging Joni Ernst: I want to ‘tear down’ party, ‘build it back up’