This week, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dealt a blow to six cities and 13 nonprofit groups. They ruled against restoring grant funding for essential programs focused on environmental justice, agriculture, and climate change. The court found that a lower court had overstepped its authority by preventing the Trump administration from terminating these grants.
The panel, which included judges appointed by three different presidents, stated, “the district court abused its discretion” in its initial decision. Now, the fate of some grants might rest with the federal Court of Special Claims, which handles money disputes with the government.
Kym Meyer, senior litigation director at the Southern Environmental Law Center, representing some of the plaintiffs, expressed concern. “We believe that executive agencies don’t have the power to cancel entire grant programs that Congress approved. Nothing in this ruling changes that understanding,” she emphasized.
Last year, the Trump administration paused many grants as part of a broad review of equity-related programs. This included efforts to tackle environmental injustices. Nineteen groups, like CleanAIRE NC and the Bronx River Alliance, filed a lawsuit last March. They argued that the administration’s actions were unconstitutional since Congress had approved funding for these programs.
The plaintiffs described the terminations as “arbitrary and capricious,” suggesting they violated regulations set by the Administrative Procedures Act. In May, a federal judge sided with the plaintiffs, ordering the government to restore funding for most of the affected programs. However, this decision was temporarily halted when the administration appealed.
During the recent hearings, the Justice Department framed the issue as a contractual matter rather than a constitutional one. The appellate judges largely concurred, stating that there is no law mandating the government to specifically contract with these plaintiffs.
One of the plaintiffs, CleanAIRE NC, based in Charlotte, was set to receive a $500,000 grant from the EPA to monitor air quality in underserved communities. Their executive director, Jeffrey Robbins, expressed frustration but remained hopeful. “This isn’t the end. We’re still determined to challenge the government’s decision to cancel these programs,” he said.
Federal courts still have the potential to address broader legal concerns regarding the unilateral cancellation of these programs. Judges referenced a recent Supreme Court decision, National Institutes of Health v. American Public Health Association, which ruled against federal jurisdiction in similar matters. However, Justice Amy Coney Barrett noted that some aspects of the government’s decision might still be challenged in court.
Meyer is optimistic about presenting evidence to the district court to seek the restoration of these vital programs. “This administration didn’t just terminate specific grants; they eliminated entire programs,” she added.
This ongoing legal battle underscores the tension between government actions and public needs. As environmental issues and social justice remain at the forefront, many are closely watching how this case unfolds. Recent statistics show that environmental justice initiatives are more crucial than ever. A survey from the Environmental Protection Agency indicates that communities of color are disproportionately affected by pollution and climate change, making these grants essential for addressing long-standing inequalities.
As the situation develops, it remains to be seen how the courts will navigate the complex intersection of administrative authority and congressional intent.
Source link
CleanAIRE NC,Environment and Climate Justice block grant program,EPA,Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals,Justice Amy Coney Barrett,Justice Department,Lee Zeldin,Litigation,National Institutes of Health v. American Public Health Association,North Carolina State University,Russell Vought,Southern Environmental Law Center,Supreme Court,U.S. District Court Judge Richard Gergel
