Federal Accountability

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today, along with 20 other state attorneys general, filed amicus briefs in support of WilmerHale and Jenner & Block in their lawsuits against the Trump Administration over its retaliatory executive orders, which target law firms that represent clients or positions it disagrees with. If allowed to take effect, these orders would make it harder for those the President disfavors to retain counsel, interfering with lawyers’ practice of law, chilling free speech in and out of courtrooms, and hindering courts’ exercise of the judicial power.  

“The Trump Administration’s disregard for the First Amendment and disrespect for foundational tenets of American democracy is egregious and alarming,” said Attorney General Bonta. “I stand in strong support of my fellow attorneys at WilmerHale and Jenner & Block and applaud their staunch refusal to bow to the President’s unconstitutional demands, even as some of their peers abandon their principles and strike deals with this Administration. I urge the court to grant permanent injunctions and end the President’s latest attempt to undermine our adversarial judicial system and the rule of law.” 

In their amicus brief, the attorneys general support WilmerHale and Jenner & Block’s motions for summary judgment to permanently halt the Trump Administration’s retaliatory actions against these law firms. The attorneys general argue that the orders violate the First Amendment, disregard the right to counsel under the First and Sixth Amendments, and severely undermine the rule of law.  

Attorney General Bonta has vocally and vigorously called out President Trump’s assault on the rule of law. Last month, Attorney General Bonta, along with 20 other state attorneys general issued an open letter urging the legal community to stand together in defense of the rule of law in response to President Trump’s recent attacks, which include calls for the impeachment of federal judges and threats of retribution against law firms and attorneys who take or have taken positions in opposition to him or his Administration. Attorney General Bonta also issued a separate statement on the need to speak up and push back when our democratic norms are violated, our legal system undermined, and our laws broken. Earlier, Attorney General Bonta filed an amicus brief in support of another law firm, Perkins Coie, that had been targeted by President Trump for its representation of Hillary Clinton and its diversity, equity, and inclusion policies.

Attorney General Bonta joins the attorneys general of Illinois, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Washington, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island and Vermont in filing the amicus briefs.  

A copy of the brief in support of WilmerHale is available here. A copy of the brief in support of Jenner & Block is available here. 

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today filed a lawsuit challenging the U.S. Department of Education’s (ED) abrupt and unlawful rescission of prior agency actions that preserved states’ access to hundreds of millions of dollars in funding currently being used by school districts to support the academic recovery of students following the COVID-19 pandemic. Attorney General Bonta joined 15 other attorneys general in filing the lawsuit, arguing that ED’s decision to rescind access to this funding is arbitrary and capricious in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act, exceeds ED’s statutory and regulatory authority under the law, and will cause immediate and devastating harm to school districts in California and across the nation. In California alone, over $200 million in previously awarded and obligated funding is at stake – funding that school districts are already putting to use for programs such as afterschool and summer learning initiatives, the purchase of educational technology, and the provision of mental health services and support. 

“The Trump Administration’s blatant disregard for the education of our children is on full display with this latest round of funding cuts,” said Attorney General Bonta. “With each step President Trump takes to dismantle the Education Department, he is throwing our schools into turmoil and jeopardizing the academic success of a generation of American children. As a father, I can’t stand by and let this happen. I’m taking the President to court for the 13th time to help ensure our kids get the educational opportunities they deserve.”

On March 28, 2025, Education Secretary Linda McMahon notified state departments of education that ED had unilaterally rescinded its previous actions preserving states’ access to awarded and obligated education funding that is currently supporting ongoing programs and services in local school districts across the country. These programs and services address, among other things, the impact of lost instructional time; students’ academic, social, and emotional needs; and the disproportionate impact of the coronavirus on economically disadvantaged students, including homeless children and children in foster care.  

In the lawsuit, Attorney General Bonta and the multistate coalition assert that the Department’s actions are arbitrary and capricious and contrary to law in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act. The coalition seeks a court order vacating the termination and reinstating ED’s prior approvals allowing states to access this funding through March 2026. 

Joining Attorney General Bonta in filing this lawsuit are the attorneys general of Arizona, Delaware, Hawai’i, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, and the District of Columbia, along with the Governor of Pennsylvania.

A copy of the lawsuit is available here.

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Bonta today, alongside 23 attorneys general, filed an amicus brief to continue their support for Gwynne Wilcox, who is appealing her case against President Donald Trump’s unlawful attempt to remove her as a Member of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, the attorneys general maintain their steadfast support for Member Wilcox and urge the Court to affirm the summary judgment by the Court of Appeals, which blocked the President from removing Wilcox.

On February 28, Attorney General Bonta, as part of a coalition of 20 attorneys general, filed his first amicus brief in Wilcox v. Trump in support of Gwynne Wilcox, who challenged the President’s unlawful removal of her position as a Member of the NLRB. Soon after, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia issued an order declaring that Member Wilcox should remain a full member of the NLRB and found the President’s action firing her to be “blatantly illegal.” The Trump administration appealed and asked for a stay to stop the ruling during the appeal, which would effectively allow her firing to take effect. The attorneys general filed another amicus brief, urging the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to deny the administration’s request for a stay. The federal appeals court ultimately denied the Administration’s request, and today's brief supports Wilcox on the merits of her appeal.

“Time and again, we are seeing the President’s continuous attempt to trample on workers’ rights,” said Attorney General Bonta. “My fellow attorneys general and I remain unwavering in our commitment to stand against the President’s unlawful removal of Member Wilcox from NLRB.”

The NLRB is an independent federal agency that enforces U.S. labor laws related to workers’ rights, union representation, and collective bargaining. It oversees union elections, ensuring that employees can freely choose whether to be represented by a union. The Board also investigates and resolves unfair labor practice charges against employers and unions, addressing issues like retaliation, unlawful firings, and refusal to bargain in good faith. The NLRB also adjudicates disputes under the NLRA and issues rulings that shape labor law policies. To protect the NLRB from political pressure by the President, NLRB board members are appointed by the President and confirmed by Congress for staggered 5-year terms. Board members do not serve at the pleasure of the President. Federal law provides that Board members can only be removed by the President “upon notice and hearing, for neglect of duty or malfeasance in office, but for no other cause.”  

In the amicus brief, the attorneys general strongly support the affirmance of the summary judgment by the Court of Appeals, which blocked the President from removing Wilcox and highlight that the President violated the NLRA by unlawfully removing Wilcox from the Board. The attorneys general also lay out the detrimental implications of an incapacitated NLRB  should the Trump Administration not be prevented from taking away from American workers the entity that Congress authorized to ensure the ability to join a union and engage in collective bargaining, protections which workers have relied on for decades. This regulatory vacuum will be deeply troubling given the importance and scale of the work done by the NLRB. In the past decade, the NLRB reviewed nearly 3,000 allegations of unfair labor practices. 

Attorney General Bonta joins the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin. 

A copy of the brief can be found here. 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta, as part of a coalition of 23 attorneys general, announced the filing of an amicus brief in Harris v. Bessent in support of Cathy Harris, who is challenging President Donald Trump over her unlawful removal from the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). The United States District Court for the District of Columbia issued an order in the case declaring that Chairperson Harris should remain a full member of the MSPB. The federal government appealed the Court’s decision, and the coalition of attorneys general today filed an amicus brief in full support of Chairperson Harris, who is opposing the federal government’s appeal of the district court’s order to reinstate the Chairperson to her position following her unlawful removal.

“With the President’s continuous attacks on workers’ rights, the Merit Systems Protection Board's work to safeguard the rights of federal employees is now more critical than ever. Any attempt to undermine the Board’s statutory protections threatens the integrity of the federal workforce and the ability of career public servants to do their jobs, free from political interference,” said Attorney General Bonta. “That’s why I, alongside attorneys general across the nation, fully support Chairperson Harris’ challenge of her unlawful removal and urge the Court to reinstate her position.”

The MSPB is an independent quasi-judicial body that protects federal merit principles and ensures that they are applied uniformly and fairly. Its primary role is to adjudicate appeals from federal employees who believe they have been subjected to unjust personnel actions, such as wrongful termination, demotion, or whistleblower retaliation. The Board also ensures that employment decisions are based on merit, free from political influence or discrimination.

In the amicus brief, the attorneys general strongly support the Chairperson’s opposition to the federal government’s appeal and highlight that the President’s removal is unlawful under the terms of the Civil Service Reform Act. Members of the board are only subject to removal for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” The attorneys general also underscore the importance of the MSPB, specifically in hearing the appeals of federal employees who may have been denied their employment rights in the federal civil service. Given the current challenges, the Board is particularly critical as thousands of federal employees are being fired under circumstances that may violate civil service protections. Yet without Chairperson Harris, the MSPB lacks a quorum and would effectively cease to operate.

Attorney General Bonta joins the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaiʻi, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia in filing this amicus brief.

A copy of the brief can be found here. 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today issued the following statement after the U.S. Supreme Court stayed a temporary restraining order (TRO) granted by the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, in a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s unlawful termination of multi-year grants for K-12 teacher preparation programs. California and a coalition of seven other states obtained the TRO on March 10, 2025, and the U.S. Supreme Court’s order today allows the Trump Administration to go forward with terminating the multi-year grant programs that address the ongoing teacher shortage faced by states across the nation through teacher preparation programs while litigation is ongoing. The Supreme Court’s Order does not conclusively resolve any of the issues in this case, and the preliminary injunction motion is still pending. The evidence presented in the district court is concrete and establishes that without immediate relief many of the programs will shutter – harming the States' students and aspiring teachers.

“The Trump Administration is pursuing an anti-education agenda that would yank teachers out of schools and prevent new teachers-in-training who are close to being ready to serve our students from filling empty classrooms,” said Attorney General Bonta. “While we would have preferred to maintain the TRO, we respect the court process, and we look forward to continuing to make our case in the lower court. California and our multistate coalition remain committed to fighting, so that our kids — especially those in high-poverty or high need schools — have access to qualified, talented teachers and a quality education.”

More information on the K-12 teacher grant lawsuit is available here.

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today issued the following statement in response to the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island granting the motion to enforce the preliminary injunction against the Trump Administration as states continue to face obstacles in accessing obligated Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) funding, including FEMA funding for critical emergency preparedness and recovery programs. Specifically, the Court found that FEMA’s current freeze violates the Court’s preliminary injunction order. 

“Today’s court order makes it unequivocally clear: the Trump Administration’s reckless effort to hold up millions in emergency funds is unlawful,” said Attorney General Bonta. “We won’t stand idly by as we continue to see the Trump Administration breaking the law and will be closely monitoring to ensure that the Administration follows the court’s order and critical funds are released." 

In January, a coalition of 23 attorneys general, led by the attorneys general of California, New York, Rhode Island, Illinois, and Massachusetts, sued the Trump Administration over its attempt to freeze up to $3 trillion in federal funding. The U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island quickly granted the attorneys general’s request for a temporary restraining order, blocking the freeze’s implementation until further order from the court. Soon after, the attorneys general filed motions to enforce and a preliminary injunction to stop the illegal freeze and preserve federal funding that Congress appropriated and that families, communities, and states rely on. The Court granted the motion to enforce, ordering the Administration to immediately comply with its temporary restraining order, and later, the motion for a preliminary injunction. Despite the coalition’s success in unlocking billions in wrongfully frozen funds through a preliminary injunction and earlier motion to enforce, the Trump Administration has continued to freeze millions of dollars in FEMA funding for critical emergency preparedness and recovery programs. The current FEMA freezes have not affected Los Angeles wildfire recovery funds but have affected wildfire recovery funding in other states, including for the Maui wildfires. Today’s order grants the motion the coalition made last week, asking the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island to enforce its preliminary injunction against the Trump Administration’s FEMA freeze.

Attorney General Bonta is joined by the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, North Carolina, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin in securing this motion. 

A copy of the order is available here. 

California’s 12th lawsuit against the Trump Administration seeks to protect federal workers and the essential services they provide to support American families, businesses, workers, and our cultural heritage 

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Bonta today joined a coalition of 21 attorneys general in filing a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s unlawful Executive Order No. 14238 (Closure Order) directing several Congressionally-established agencies, including the Institute of Museum and Library Services, the Minority Business Development Agency, and the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, to eliminate every component and function not required by statute and reduce their statutorily required functions and associated staff to the minimum required by law. The President also ordered the Office of Management and Budget to deny these agencies authorization to spend federal funds already allocated by Congress for any functions beyond the minimum required by statute. The March 14, 2025 Closure Order is the Trump Administration’s latest attempt to unlawfully dismantle agencies that Americans rely on. This time, he is targeting agencies that provide services and funding supporting public libraries and museums, workers, and minority-owned businesses nationwide. The agencies subject to the Closure Order collectively provide billions of dollars in funding to States to support libraries, museums, and disadvantaged businesses, provide services that States rely on to peaceably resolve labor disputes, and more. In the lawsuit, the attorneys general argue that the Closure Order and its implementation are unlawful and cannot stand.

“The Trump Administration is once again violating the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law by attempting to unilaterally shut down agencies the President doesn’t like, including agencies that give the public access to facts, knowledge, and cultural heritage for free or at low cost,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Dismantling these agencies would have a devastating impact on the public and on states across the nation — they provide important services for Americans and collectively provide billions of dollars to States to support libraries and museums, innovation and entrepreneurship for disadvantaged businesses, and help resolve labor disputes. The Order also threatens the livelihoods of federal workers employed at these agencies, once again flying in the face of the President's promise to ease the financial burden felt by American families. The Trump Administration’s actions to strip these agencies down to their studs is blatantly illegal. As the President continues to flout his duty to the American people and the rule of law, I will continue to stand with my fellow attorneys general to uphold the Constitution and protect the crucial services that Californians rely on.”

Following the Closure Order, the President directed agencies to report within one week whether they had achieved “full compliance” with the order, despite the fact that “full compliance” means near-total incapacitation of these agencies. As of April 4, the functions of at least three of these agencies have been completely incapacitated. For example, the Minority Business Development Agency has placed all but five of its more than 40 personnel on administrative leave and instructed them to wind down the agency’s remaining work. The Minority Business Development Agency supports more than 70 public-private business centers throughout the nation that provide business consultation, including centers that are specifically geared toward manufacturing businesses and businesses in rural areas. Three of these centers are located in California: in Los Angeles, Sacramento, and San Jose. In 2023 alone, the agency served more than 2,000 entrepreneurs who, in turn, created nearly 19,000 jobs. The President's unlawful actions have also incapacitated the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, an agency that drives economic growth and innovation by mediating labor disputes in industries that affect commerce and negotiating collective bargaining agreements. The Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service has slashed its staff from roughly 200 to fewer than 15 individuals and ordered its staff to stop mediating labor disputes for public center entities, handling grievances arising out of collective bargaining agreements, or conducting public training or education efforts—essentially abandoning many of the core functions of this nearly 80-year-old agency.

The Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) has also been materially harmed by the President’s Closure Order. IMLS supports libraries, museums, and related institutions through grant funding, research, and policy development, with the aim of advancing innovation, lifelong learning, and cultural and civic engagement. IMLS’ largest funding program —and the largest source of federal funding for library services — is its Grants to States Program. In 2024, IMLS invested $180 million in libraries nationwide under its Grants to States Program. The administration’s action will threaten hundreds of library staff across the country that provide essential services to their communities. As of April 1, IMLS placed 85% of its staff on administrative leave, dramatically curtailed its administration of hundreds of grants and grant applications, and terminated statutorily mandated grant awards to several States. 

The gutting of IMLS will cause destructive harm to California’s libraries and museums and the communities they serve. For example, California libraries employ approximately 17,000 employees who staff the State’s 1,127 libraries and serve 23 million California library card holders. The California State Library budget for this year included $15.7 million in IMLS funding allocated for staffing and continued operations. Over the last 40 years, IMLS funds have paid for multiple statewide library programs, including support for tutors helping adults and children read, write, and learn English; summer reading and activity programs; and services that help feed low-income children when school is out. IMLS funds also pay for continuing education for librarians and library workers, a 300,000-title eBook library accessible to all Californians, and digital efforts to protect California’s cultural heritage and local history. If the Closure Order stands, all functions and staff positions paid for with IMLS funding will cease to exist. The loss of these services would particularly harm lower-income families, seniors, and veterans who rely on libraries to help them navigate an increasingly digital world. The Trump Administration's actions also threaten grants that support California's incredible museums from the San Diego Zoo to the Exploratorium in San Francisco to Los Angeles' Autry Museum of the American West. 

In today’s lawsuit, Attorney General Bonta and a multistate coalition demonstrate that President Trump’s directive to shut down these agencies, and the steps taken to implement that directive, are unlawful and must be reversed. The coalition establishes that the Trump Administration cannot undo the many acts of Congress that authorize these agencies, dictate their responsibilities, and appropriate funds for the agencies to administer. The Trump Administration’s attempt to do so through the Closure Order violates the Executive Branch’s obligation to take care that the law is faithfully executed. Further, as the complaint details, the Closure Order and its implementation by the agencies violate both the Appropriations Clause and Separation of Powers Clause of the U.S. Constitution and broadly exceed the narrow discretion the Executive possesses under the Impoundment Control Act.

Attorney General Bonta joined the lawsuit alongside the attorneys general of New York, Rhode Island, Hawaii, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin. 

A copy of the lawsuit is available here.

In 2024, NIH awarded $5.15 billion in grants and contracts that directly supported 55,324 jobs and $13.81 billion in economic activity in California

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today co-led 16 attorneys general in filing a lawsuit against the Trump Administration, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for failing to disperse grant funds and for unlawfully terminating existing grants for medical and public health research institutions across the country. Despite Congressional direction, the NIH has drastically reduced its funding to advance the United States' understanding of human disease and potential treatments. As a result, California universities have begun curtailing biomedical research and delaying the hiring of new staff and students who depend on NIH funding.

“In their unlawful withholding and terminating of medical and public health research grants, the Trump Administration is upending not only the critical work being done today, but the promise of progress for future generations,” said Attorney General Rob Bonta. “Through research, we save lives, improve public wellbeing and create new economic opportunities that support a vibrant economy. Let me be clear: in California, NIH funding creates over 50,000 jobs and billions of dollars in economic activity. Over the decades, this funding has brought humanity the eradication of polio, discovery of the gene that causes breast and ovarian cancer, and the transformation of HIV from a fatal disease into one people can live with. Gutting NIH funding is a deep loss to innovation and progress built upon for decades — and it’s illegal. My office is proudly leading the charge to demand that the Trump Administration immediately restore funding to the important work being done in labs, schools, and hospitals across the nation.”

"The American research enterprise is the most successful, important, and impactful in the world,” said UC President Michael V. Drake, M.D. “We must continue to do all we can to develop treatments and cures for the serious medical conditions that threaten us all."

“We applaud the attorney general for filing this lawsuit. NIH funding is vital to the CSU’s ability to offer immersive student learning and discovery through distinctive research programs that directly benefit the health of all Americans,” said Ganesh Raman, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Research at the California State University. “These grants not only support research, but they also provide stipend and other funding that impact hundreds of CSU students, staff and faculty who engage in meaningful, and career-defining work. Terminating these federal grants will cause irreparable harm, undermine scientific progress and our collective capacity to innovate and lead California’s economy.”

NIH is the federal agency responsible for biomedical and public health research. Over 80% of Congressional funding supports NIH research and training at external labs, schools, and hospitals. It is estimated that every $1 invested in NIH research generates $2.56 of economic activity.

Over the years, NIH-supported research has had a profound impact on the health and wellbeing of the American people. NIH scientists pioneered the rubella vaccine, eradicating a disease that, in the 1960s, killed thousands of babies and left thousands more with lifelong disabilities. NIH studies led to the discovery of the BRCA mutation, helping countless Americans reduce their risk of breast and ovarian cancer. NIH research fueled the development of treatments for HIV and AIDS, transforming what used to be a fatal disease into one with a nearly normal life expectancy.   

The termination of NIH funding for research interventions to prevent or treat the spread of diseases like HIV/AIDS, Covid and other virus families of pandemic concern — including emerging diseases such as Dengue, Chikungunya, and Zika — increases the risk of and incidence of these diseases in California. The terminations have specifically targeted some of the most vulnerable Californians, including women experiencing domestic violence, children at risk of suicide, and underserved communities at a higher risk of chronic or infectious diseases.

Yet the Trump Administration has frozen the highly competitive process for approving new NIH grants. The Administration has also terminated existing NIH grants without any reasonable explanations after those grants were funded based on their scientific merit and potential innovative impact and appears to have terminated grants based on the projects' perceived connection to "DEI,” "transgender issues,” "vaccine hesitancy," or other topics disfavored by the Trump Administration. Similarly, training grants directed to increase diversity in the research work force have been pulled from review. NIH claims that these grants “no longer effectuate agency priorities.” 

In today’s lawsuit, the attorneys general argue that the Trump Administration’s actions are arbitrary and capricious. The Trump Administration does not have the authority to unilaterally decline spending congressionally appropriated funds. 

In February, Attorney General Bonta filed a lawsuit against the Trump Administration’s unlawful attempt to cut “indirect cost” reimbursements at every research institution throughout the country. Indirect cost reimbursements refer to expenses that are necessary to support research but are not easily linked to a specific research project. 

In bringing today’s lawsuit Attorney General Bonta and the attorneys general of Massachusetts, Maryland, and Washington lead the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin. 

A copy of the complaint can be found here.

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Bonta today issued a statement on the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island’s decision granting a temporary restraining order that immediately restores $11 billion in critical public health funding to state and local public health agencies across the country, including $972 million to California.

“Two days after filing our 9th lawsuit against the Trump Administration, we have secured a temporary order that restores public health funding and ensures communities nationwide are prepared for public health threats,” said Attorney General Bonta. “As our lawsuit continues, we remain steadfast in our commitment to ensure state and local health agencies have what they need to keep Americans healthy and safe.”

Beginning on March 24, 2025, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) abruptly, with no advance notice or warning, issued termination notices to state and local public health agencies across the country, purporting to end federal funding for grants that provide essential support for a wide range of urgent public health needs, including identifying, tracking, and addressing infectious diseases; ensuring access to immunizations; and modernizing critical public health infrastructure. The federal funding was appropriated by Congress to ensure the United States is better prepared for future public health threats.

On Tuesday, Attorney General Bonta announced co-leading a coalition of 23 states and the District of Columbia in filing a lawsuit against the Trump Administration’s HHS and HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. over the unlawful termination of public health funding. Today, the court responded by granting the requested temporary restraining order. 

The order temporarily restores essential public health funding and vital programs that serve millions of Californians, including children, rural communities, and nursing homes, including: 

• Over $800 million that the California Department of Public Health intended to use, in part, to vaccinate 4.5 million children statewide and assist hospitals in directing injured and ill patients to available health facilities during all types of emergencies, where efficient routing saves lives. 
• $119 million to the California Department of Health Care Services which supports key programs, including substance use disorder prevention and early intervention services for youth in at least 18 counties. 
• $45 million to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health to use in part, to strengthen the County’s efforts to prevent the spread of measles, and seasonal and avian influenza. 

A copy of the order can be found here. 

10th lawsuit against Trump Administration asserts that voting restrictions are not authorized by U.S. Constitution or Congress

SACRAMENTO — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced that he is leading, with Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford, a coalition of 19 attorneys general in filing a lawsuit against President Donald J. Trump, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, the federal Election Assistance Commission, and other Trump Administration officials over Executive Order No. 14248 (the Elections Executive Order), an unconstitutional, antidemocratic, and un-American attempt to impose sweeping voting restrictions across the country. Among other things, the Elections Executive Order attempts to conscript State election officials in the President’s campaign to impose documentary proof of citizenship requirements when Americans seek to register to vote. It also seeks to upend common-sense, well-established State procedures for counting ballots — procedures that make it easier for peoples’ voices to be heard. 

The President has no constitutional power to rewrite State election laws by decree, nor does the President have the authority to modify the rules Congress has created for elections. The coalition’s lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, explains that the power to regulate elections is reserved to the States and Congress, and that therefore, the Elections Executive Order is ultra vires, beyond the scope of presidential power, and violative of the separation of powers. The attorneys general ask the court to block the challenged provisions of the Elections Executive Order and declare them unconstitutional and void.

“Day after day, we continue to witness President Trump’s utter disdain for the rule of law. Let me remind him: He is not a king,” said California Attorney General Rob Bonta. “When he took office, he swore to ‘preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.’ He also has a constitutional obligation to ‘take care that the laws be faithfully executed,’ and that doesn’t involve rewriting them however he sees fit. My fellow attorneys general and I are taking him to court because this Executive Order is nothing but a blatantly illegal power grab and an attempt to disenfranchise voters. Neither the Constitution nor Congress authorize the President’s attempted voting restrictions. We will not be bullied by him. We will fight like hell in court to stop him.”

“I stand with Attorney General Bonta and the 18 other state attorneys general that have filed a lawsuit to challenge President Trump’s unconstitutional executive order which, if left unfettered, will compromise critical state and local election processes and disenfranchise millions of American voters. This executive order is an illegal attempt to trample on the states and Congress’s constitutional authority over elections,” said California Secretary of State Shirley Weber. “Throughout history, people have tried to make voting more difficult through oppressive means such as poll taxes, literacy tests, improper voter roll purges, strategic polling place closures, and voter intimidation tactics. The progress this nation has made over the past 60 years since the passage of the Voters Rights Act cannot be minimized and should not be erased.”

In their lawsuit, the attorneys general assert that provisions of the Elections Executive Order will cause imminent and irreparable harm to the States if they are not enjoined. The challenged provisions include:

• Forcing the Election Assistance Commission (the Commission) to require documentary proof of citizenship on the Federal mail registration form (the Federal Form). The Commission is an independent, bipartisan, four-member body established by Congress. It is responsible for developing the Federal Form, in consultation with the chief election officers of the States, for the registration of voters for elections for Federal office. In their lawsuit, the attorneys general underscore that Congress has never required documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote using the Federal Form. 
• Forcing States to alter their ballot counting laws to exclude “absentee or mail-in ballots received after Election Day.” Consistent with federal law, members of the multistate coalition have exercised their constitutional and statutory authority to determine how to best receive and count votes that are timely cast by mail in federal elections. Many of the Plaintiff States provide for the counting of timely absentee and mail ballots received after Election Day. For example, California law provides that ballots returned by mail are timely if postmarked by Election Day and received within seven days. 
• Requiring military and overseas voters to submit documentary proof of citizenship and eligibility to vote in state elections. The Federal Post Card Application form is used by voters in the military or living abroad to register to vote in federal elections. Federal law unequivocally grants them the ability to register and cast a ballot “in the last place in which the person was domiciled before leaving the United States” — there is no requirement that this form demand documentary proof of citizenship or proof of current eligibility to vote in a particular state.
• Commanding the head of each state-designated Federal voter registration agency to immediately begin “assess[ing] citizenship prior to providing a Federal voter registration form to enrollees of public assistance programs.” This aspect of the Elections Executive Order commandeers State agencies and their personnel, forcing States to participate in the President’s unlawful and unnecessary agenda. 
• Threatening to withhold various streams of federal funding to the States for purported noncompliance with the challenged provisions. In so doing, the Elections Executive Order seeks to control Plaintiff States’ exercise of their sovereign powers through raw Executive domination, contrary to the U.S. Constitution and its underlying principles of federalism and the separation of powers. 

In filing today’s lawsuit, Attorneys General Bonta and Ford are joined by the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin.

A copy of the complaint can be found here.