Thread by @ProfMJCleveland

🚨🚨🚨THREAD on why two lawsuits against Trump Administration re spending freezes are "moot." Late yesterday federal judge in D.C. (Biden appointee) entered an administrative stay of OMB-25-13. That lawsuit was brought by multiple associations that represent non-profits. 1/

2/ Also yesterday, gaggle of blue State's filed lawsuit in a Rhode Island federal court before an Obama appointee, likewise challenging OMB-25-13 and seeking a TRO (temporary restraining order). But today, OMB rescinded 25-13 & Trump Adm. filed notice of rescission saying moot.

3/ During today's hearing, Judge McConnell reportedly suggested he was inclined to grant the TRO given that Press Secretary's comments that freeze remains on. IF Judge McConnell enters TRO it would be outrageously wrong--but a TRO cannot (typically) be appealed!

4/ Here's why it would be outrageously wrong to enter TRO: State's complaint alleged counts based on the OMB Directive. That Directive no longer exists. That's why the administrative stay entered by D.C. District Court judge no longer has any effect--it stayed that directive.

5/ Now, it may be that in following Trump's various other executive orders various agencies do something that freezes spending but they haven't yet (ripeness, i.e. case isn't ripe or ready to hear), we have no idea who it would hurt (standing, i.e. can these plaintiffs sue)

6/ and b/c we don't know what spending freeze is at issue, no way to analyze various counts States & non-profits bring, i.e., how do we know if Trump or agencies had power to freeze spending when we don't know what spending was.

7/ From read out of hearing, Judge McConnell seemed to recognize issue by asking for language for TRO even though he seemed hell-bent on entering TRO against Trump Administration. Good luck with that!

8/ While Trump Administration will unlikely be able to appeal TRO it is in place for only limited time (I think 21 days) & frankly won't tie Trump's hands b/c they can do everything behind scenes they were doing including freezing spending that doesn't affect States or

9/ thread needle to freeze grants that aren't covered by TRO. Then Trump can immediately appeal if Court enters preliminary injunction which the Court of Appeals should immediately overturn. AND through this Trump Administration has political victory of showing

10/ how cray-cray Left is over preserving outrageous aspects of federal budget, while exposing legacy press for pushing nonsense of Medicare cuts & cutting off food stamps, Meals-on-Wheels, etc.

11/ D.C. Court has held case until Monday but with briefing due tomorrow on TRO. DOJ will have opportunity to nail points above re standing, ripeness, injury, etc. and again reveal crazy efforts to block sensible checks on grants.

12/ It remains to be seen if the D.C. judge will accept the case is moot--the complaint in that case was even more focused on the OMB Directive than in Rhode Island--or try to tie Trump's hands, but bottom line is Trump has 4 years & any TRO will be ineffective &

13/13 merely expose judicial activism, fake-news media, and outrageous spending.

Appendix: Here is the link to the courtlistner for the States' lawsuit. Open complaint & Motion for TRO/PI and you will see all claims are based on OMB Directive since rescinded. courtlistener.com/docket/6958599…

And here is link to same for non-profits. Same problem--lawsuit is about OMB Directive and that has been rescinded.
courtlistener.com/docket/6958357…