Federal Court Blocks Trump Executive Order Denying Federal Funds to Sanctuary Cities
The decision is based on precedents in similar cases during Trump's first term.
The decision is based on precedents in similar cases during Trump's first term.
The degree of agreement among participants with major ideological diferences is striking.
The decision involved administration attempts to withhold spending on foreign aid contracts, but has much broader implications.
As with some other recent executive branch actions, the Trump Administration appears to have overreached.
This will, for the moment, avert what could have been a major legal battle over the spending power.
The White House's withholding of federal grants, impoundment plans, and other actions, are a major attack on the separation of powers.
Harvard economist Edward Glaeser, a leading expert on housing policy, offers some ideas on how Congress can use conditional spending to break down barriers to housing construction.
Like the Sixth Circuit before it, the Eleventh ruled that the requirement that states receiving stimulus money refrain from cutting taxes was never clearly authorized by Congress.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit concluded some state challenges to the COVID relief bill were not justiciable, but reaches the merits in one case and finds the law lacking.
I am one of the relatively few people who think the Court got both cases right.
Language in the American Rescue Plan Act prohibits states from using the funds "directly or indirectly" to offset lost revenues from tax cuts.
My review of Philip Hamburger's new book, Purchasing Submission.
Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.
This modal will close in 10