Federal Accountability

Files Lawsuit Against Federal Government to Stop Mass Firing of Probationary Employees 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today filed a lawsuit challenging numerous federal agencies for conducting an illegal mass firing of federal probationary employees. In today’s lawsuit, 20 attorneys general argue that the Trump Administration’s Office of Personnel Management’s directive to agencies to terminate probationary employees en masse to reduce the size of the federal workforce exceeds any statutory authority granted by Congress. The lawsuit seeks to immediately halt further firings and reinstate unlawfully terminated federal employees while litigation proceeds.

“The Trump Administration’s sweeping mass firing of probationary federal employees is simply unlawful,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Not only is the administration breaking the law, while they claim these actions are necessary to ‘curb waste and inefficiency,’ the reality is that abrupt and indiscriminate terminations will lead to increased operation disruptions, higher rehiring costs, and long-term financial burdens on taxpayers. This reckless directive has inflicted chaos and harmed federal workers who are key contributors to our economy and provide critical services that affect the everyday lives of Californians, from offering support for veterans and farmers, to protection of our cherished national parks and lands. I won’t stand idly by as the President attempts yet another unlawful power grab. I am proud to file this lawsuit with my fellow attorneys general across the nation to reinstate unlawfully terminated federal employees and halt further firings.”

Nationally, there are more than 5.1 million federal workers. Nearly all federal employees serve a one-or two-year probationary period, and more than 200,000 are on probationary status across the federal government. In California, numerous federal employees serve in critical roles across key agencies including the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Department of Agriculture, the National Park Service, and the U.S. Forest Service, among others.

The abrupt, pretextual termination of federal employees is not only unlawful but also disrupts essential government services and has far reaching economic effects. Specifically, in California, federal employees heavily contribute to our economy by paying state income taxes and generating substantial local revenue. This unlawful reduction in workforce has already caused a 149% increase in state unemployment benefit claims by federal workers and will inevitably impact small businesses through decreased consumer spending and decline in demand. This callous decision not only fuels broader economic uncertainty but directly contradicts yet another of the President’s empty promises to “immediately bring prices down, starting on day one” of his presidency. 

In the complaint, the attorneys general allege that the Trump Administration's failure to comply with Reduction in Force (RIF) procedures was arbitrary and capricious, not in accordance with law, and in violation of the federal Administrative Procedures Act. These critical protections ensure that workers and impacted communities receive advance notice of mass layoffs to blunt the disruptions they cause for the affected personnel and their communities and also ensure that personnel such as military veterans are given preference in retaining their jobs.

When a RIF results in a layoff of 50 or more employees, the agency must generally give at least 60 days’ advance notice to state governments, so they can provide vital “rapid response” information, resources, and services to affected workers. The federal agencies named in the lawsuit failed to provide any advance notice to California, causing significant expense and burden on the state as it scrambles to respond to the sudden mass layoffs of its residents. In the month of February 2025, there was a 149% uptick in unemployment insurance claims filed by individuals recently terminated from federal service. 

The attorneys general are seeking declaratory relief, a temporary restraining order to pause further mass firings, and preliminary and permanent injunctive relief that would reinstate unlawfully terminated federal employees and enjoin further terminations that do not follow required legal procedures.

Attorney General Bonta is joined by the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawai‛i, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia in filing this lawsuit. 

A copy of the complaint can be found here. A copy of the motion for a temporary restraining order and supporting memorandum can be found here and here. 

If allowed to go into effect, the federal funding freeze would have threatened hundreds of billions of dollars in California annually, including vital public safety, healthcare, childcare, and infrastructure funding, and other essential services

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today secured a decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island preventing the Trump Administration from implementing a sweeping federal funding freeze while litigation continues. The Court finds that the states are likely to succeed in their claims that the Trump Administration violated the Administrative Procedure Act by freezing funds in contravention of underlying appropriations statutes and that their actions were arbitrary and capricious. The Court specifically notes that the Trump Administration has failed to rebut the harms that the states have presented, including to the states’ most vulnerable residents. These include the potential impacts to services that increase workplace health and safety, water quality, critical transportation infrastructure, and law enforcement and public safety, as well as programs such as Head Start, education services for students with disabilities, and research projects at state universities. Attorney General Bonta led a coalition of 23 attorneys general in filing a lawsuit to block the funding freeze last month. 

“Last month, the Trump Administration chaotically implemented a sweeping federal funding freeze, halting access to billions of dollars in funds lawfully appropriated by Congress. In doing so, it willfully ignored the immediate devastation a freeze would have on the health, safety, and wellbeing of communities and businesses across the country,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Staff in my office worked overnight to ready a lawsuit challenging this illegal freeze and have continued to fight for these critical funds. Today’s decision is an important victory for the rule of law and for the many programs throughout our state that rely on federal funding to carry out their mission. But the fight is not over, and we will continue to work to secure a permanent decision blocking this radical freeze.”

BACKGROUND 

Last month, 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 vital 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 for enforcement and a preliminary injunction to stop the illegal freeze and preserve federal funding that families, communities, and states rely on. The court granted the motion for enforcement, ordering the Administration to immediately comply with the temporary restraining order and stop unlawfully freezing federal funds. 

In just this fiscal year, California is expected to receive $168 billion in federal funding – 34% of the state’s budget – not including funding for the state’s public college and university system. This includes $107.5 billion in funding for California’s Medicaid programs, which serve approximately 14.5 million Californians, including 5 million children and 2.3 million seniors and people with disabilities. Additionally, over 9,000 full-time equivalent state employee positions are federally funded.

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 the preliminary injunction.   

A copy of the preliminary injunction is available here.

Grant funding with a total value of at least $148 million at stake for California programs that address state’s ongoing teacher shortage

LOS ANGELES – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today, leading a multistate coalition, filed a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s unlawful termination of grant funding for K-12 teacher preparation programs. Beginning on February 7, California institutions received letters purporting to terminate grants with a total value of at least $148 million in critical funding to address the state’s ongoing teacher shortage through teacher preparation programs. These programs are designed to create a pipeline for teachers serving rural and urban communities and teaching harder-to-fill positions like math and science and have been shown to increase teacher retention rates and ensure that educators remain in the profession beyond the crucial first five years. The attorneys general argue that the terminations, impacting institutions across the nation and which were issued without warning and with immediate effect, violate the Administrative Procedure Act. The attorneys general are seeking an order to prevent disruptions to these programs, which would immediately reduce the number of teachers and teacher trainees serving in schools.

“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 Rob Bonta. “States across the nation are facing a critical teacher shortage. But instead of trying to help us solve it, instead of doing the bare minimum and honoring grants that have already been awarded and obligated, the U.S. Department of Education is attempting to terminate funding for vital teacher preparation programs that train teachers to go into hard-to-fill positions and high-poverty or high need schools across the country. As a father myself, I can’t sit back while the Trump Administration attempts to pull the rug out from under aspiring teachers – especially when it’s our kids’ education on the line. I’ll see the Trump Administration in court.”

“The elimination of funding to the Teacher Quality Partnership grants awarded to universities in the California State University system will cause widespread and irreparable harm to the students and school districts we are so honored to serve through these grants,” said California State University Chancellor Mildred García. “The programs currently in place across the CSU have proven to be extraordinarily successful at placing well-qualified and dedicated diverse educators in some of California’s highest-need districts, including our state’s rural areas. As teacher shortages continue to plague the state and nation, programs designed to attract, train and retain talented individuals to careers in K-12 education should be expanded, not defunded – and viewed as vital investments in our collective future.”

In 2024, more than 400,000 teaching positions in the U.S. — representing about one in eight of all teaching positions nationwide — were vacant or filled by uncertified teachers. When schools are unable to find qualified teachers, students suffer. Teacher shortages can result in larger class sizes, cancelled courses, or classes staffed with teachers less able to teach a subject.

To address the nationwide teacher shortage, especially for hard-to-fill subject areas, like math, science, and special education, and in hard-to-staff school districts in rural and urban areas, Congress established and allocated funding pursuant to the Teacher Quality Partnership and Supporting Effective Educator Development grant programs to train teachers, create a new teacher pipeline, and improve teacher quality. The U.S. Department of Education subsequently awarded and obligated funds to states’ public universities and associated nonprofits grants under these programs to do exactly what Congress mandated — provide teacher training, placement, and retention, and new teacher pipeline development in the states.

Beginning on February 7, 2025, the Department of Education terminated, with immediate effect, grants awarded to K-12 teacher preparation programs in California and nationwide. Hundreds of millions in grants have been terminated. In California alone, the Department provided notice of termination of grants with a total value of at least $148 million in funding across a number of grants. These terminations would be felt immediately across California schools who rely on these programs to bring teachers into their classrooms. The terminations would also cause layoffs or reductions in hours for University staff, and result in reduced or eliminated support and funding for new aspiring teachers. Impacted programs in California include:

CALIFORNIA STATE, LOS ANGELES:

Program Purpose: The Education Department terminated a new five-year $7.5 million grant to train and develop highly qualified community-centered teachers who could staff and support high-need or high-poverty urban K-12 schools and students.
Subjects Taught: The residency focuses special education, secondary STEM education, and bilingual education.
Teachers Impacted: The program’s goal is to train and certify approximately 276 teachers and educators for placement into high-needs/high-poverty K-12 urban schools. Without these funds, these teachers and educators will no longer be trained and certified to serve in schools.
School Impacted: Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) and the Pasadena Unified School District.  

CHICO STATE:

Program Purpose: The Education Department terminated a new $2.4 million five-year grant to address a chronic and acute shortage of qualified or experienced teachers within a 38,000-mile rural region of northeastern California. The program is designed to assist and enable local students in high-need rural community school districts to become teachers, and to remain in those local districts as teachers and educators.  
Schools Impacted: Schools in the Chico Unified School District, Oroville Union High School, the Glenn County Office of Education, and the Red Bluff School District.
Teachers Impacted: Approximately 225 undergraduate students, Masters students and credential candidates enrolled in teacher and educator study programs will lose financial, academic, and other support provided through the program. Without these funds, these teachers and educators will no longer be trained.
Other Impacts: Access to college courses, campus visits, and higher education preparation resources will be eliminated or greatly reduced for more than 60 local high school students.

Program Purpose: The Education Department terminated a five-year $8.5 million grant that supports a yearlong teacher residency during which students would be able to earn a Master of Arts in Teaching and a California Multiple Subject Teaching Credential. During the program, teacher candidates teach full time in a high-needs or high-poverty school while, working closely with a mentor teacher and meeting residency requirements. Those schools have a chronic and critical shortage of teachers and anticipate hiring those teacher candidates to fill existing and future teacher vacancies once they have completed the program. The termination of the grant will immediately eliminate current candidates teaching in their schools.  
Teachers Impacted: The program will recruit, prepare, and support a minimum of 60 teacher residents to serve in underserved, high-need rural districts. Without these funds, these teachers will no longer be trained.
School Impacted: High-needs or high-poverty public schools located in Butte and Tehama Counties including Palermo Union Elementary, Golden Hills Elementary, Helen M. Wilcox Elementary, Thermalito Union Elementary, Plumas Avenue Elementary, Poplar Avenue Elementary, Sierra Avenue Elementary, Corning Union Elementary, Woodson Elementary, West Street Elementary, Olive View Elementary, and Los Molinos Elementary School. 

CAL POLY, SAN LUIS OBISPO:

Program Purpose: The Education Department terminated an ongoing $2.2 million five-year grant that provides living wage stipends for residents, who in turn agree to complete three years of service after graduation in one of 32 high-need schools.
Subjects Taught: Residents who go through this program aspire to become teachers in bilingual education and special education.
School Impacted: 32 schools in the Santa Maria Bonita School District, Santa Maria Joint Union High School District, and Lucia Mar Unified School District. 
Students Impacted: Collectively, these schools serve nearly 40,000 Pre-K to 12th grade students.

Program Purpose: The Education Department terminated an ongoing $4.7 million grant to address a critical teacher shortage in important fields, including special education, by developing a high-quality teacher workforce, supporting worker retention, expanding professional development, and issuing micro credentials. 
Teachers Impacted: The program would have developed a high-quality teacher workforce by training 775 prospective educators through reformed clinical experiences and coursework. Without these funds, these educators will no longer be trained.
School Impacted: San Miguel Joint Unified School District, Shandon Joint Unified School District, Guadalupe Union School District, Lompoc Unified School District, Paso Robles Joint Unified School District, and Atascadero Unified School District. 

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES:

Program Purpose: The Education Department terminated an ongoing $8 million grant that educates middle school principals and recruits residency candidates with specialized expertise in their areas to meet the Los Angeles Unified School District's demand for single-subject middle school teachers.
Subjects Taught: Math, Science, English, and Social Science.
Teachers Impacted: The termination of the grant will impact approximately 314 educators.
Schools Impacted: Schools in the Norwalk La Mirada District, LAUSD Partnership Schools, LAUSD East Region District, Glendale Unified School District, and the Lancaster Unified School District.
Students Impacted: Over 15,000 students in classrooms within Los Angeles County school districts.

Other Impacts: The UCLA Program's structured residency model significantly enhances teacher retention rates, ensuring that early-career educators remain in the profession beyond the crucial first five years. Without this structured support, school districts will experience higher turnover rates, which lead to increased recruitment costs, staffing instability, and disruptions in student learning.

Attorney General Bonta is leading this lawsuit with Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell and New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin. They are joined by the attorneys general of Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, New York, and Wisconsin in filing the lawsuit.

A copy of the lawsuit is available here. 

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today issued the following statement in response to the U.S. District Court for Massachusetts issuing a preliminary injunction that continues blocking the Trump Administration’s unlawful and drastic National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding cuts from taking effect. The preliminary injunction is in effect with respect to institutions nationwide until further order by the court. 

“Last month, my fellow attorneys general and I secured a temporary restraining order, which blocked the Trump Administration from eviscerating funding for life-saving medical research. Now, we have secured a preliminary injunction that continues barring the Trump Administration from implementing the NIH funding cuts,” said Attorney General Bonta. “The court’s order also notes that we are likely to succeed on the merits of our claims. As we have said before, we will not allow President Trump to play politics with our public health or to break the law.” 

On February 10, 2025, Attorney General Bonta, as part of a coalition of 22 attorneys general, announced suing the Trump Administration over the NIH funding cuts and sought a temporary restraining order. Less than six hours later, the U.S. District Court for Massachusetts granted the temporary restraining order. On February 21, 2025, the court held a preliminary injunction hearing, and in advance of the hearing, Attorney General Bonta and his fellow attorneys general released a joint statement.  

A copy of the court’s order granting the preliminary injunction can be found here. 

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today, leading a coalition of 23 states, asked the District Court for the District of Rhode Island to enforce its temporary restraining order (TRO) stopping the Trump Administration from implementing its unlawful federal funding freeze as to certain Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) funding. The court granted an earlier motion to enforce amid reports of ongoing disruptions to infrastructure and energy funding. Still, despite multiple court orders, the Trump Administration has continued to block access hundreds of millions of dollars nationally in FEMA funding for critical emergency preparedness and recovery programs to address wildfires, floods, cybersecurity threats, and more.

“We have been closely monitoring the Trump Administration’s compliance with a court order stopping its radical and unlawful funding freeze,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Despite clear instructions form the court, some states are continuing to experience disruptions in accessing vital FEMA funding. We’re again asking the court to enforce its order and ensure that the Trump Administration immediately reinstates access to this funding for states across the country.”

In California, the motion to enforce addresses a FEMA grant awarded in 2022 to the Governor’s Office of Land Use & Climate Innovation under the National Flood Insurance Program, which was placed on hold on February 21, 2025. 

BACKGROUND

Last month, 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 vital 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 for enforcement 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 for enforcement, ordering the Administration to immediately comply with the temporary restraining order and stop unlawfully freezing federal funds. 

In just this fiscal year, California is expected to receive $168 billion in federal funds – 34% of the state’s budget – not including funding for the state’s public college and university system. This includes $107.5 billion in funding for California’s Medicaid programs, which serve approximately 14.5 million Californians, including 5 million children and 2.3 million seniors and people with disabilities. Additionally, over 9,000 full-time equivalent state employee positions are federally funded.

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 the seeking the preliminary injunction.   

A copy of the motion to enforce is available here.

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta, as part of a coalition of 20 attorneys general, announced the filing of an amicus brief in Wilcox v. Trump in support of Gwynne Wilcox, who is challenging President Donald Trump over her unlawful removal from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The brief underscores that this removal undermines the independence of federal agencies and exceeds presidential authority. President Trump's removal of Member Wilcox not only violated the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) but also reduced the number of Board members to two, destroying the quorum necessary for the Board to operate and ensure the enforcement of labor laws and protection of workers’ rights. In the amicus brief, the attorneys general argue that a functioning NLRB is necessary for the enforcement of labor laws across the United States and urge the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to allow Wilcox to continue performing her responsibilities as an NLRB member.
 
“Workers across the country rely on the NLRB to protect their rights by preventing unfair labor practices and safeguarding their ability to unionize. However, Member Wilcox’s unlawful removal jeopardizes these rights, as NLRB is currently inoperable—leaving the field open for bad actor employers to violate the law and trample on workers’ rights,” said Attorney General Bonta. “That’s why I’m standing with my fellow attorneys general to support Gwynne Wilcox’s motion for expedited summary judgment to allow her to continue performing her responsibilities as an NLRB member.”

 
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.”  
 
Last month, the President purported to dismiss Gwynne Wilcox from her position as a member of the NLRB without cause, an action unprecedented in the agency’s 90-year history. Wilcox, the first Black woman to serve on the NLRB, was set to conclude her tenure in August 2028.
 
In the amicus brief, the attorneys general argue that the President violated the NLRA and support Wilcox's challenge of her purported removal from the Board. With the Board currently inactive, NLRB cannot issue rules or adjudicate unfair labor practices, which creates a regulatory gap that states will have difficulty filling. This vacuum would harm workers everywhere if NLRA's inactivity continues. In the brief, the attorneys general highlight that by removing Wilcox and incapacitating the NLRB, the Trump Administration has left American workers without the entity authorized to ensure the guaranteed ability to join a union and engage in collective bargaining, protections which workers have relied on for decades. This regulatory vacuum is 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, the District of Columbia, Hawai’i, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, And Wisconsin in filing this amicus brief.

A copy of the brief can be found here.

Files second amicus brief in support of the agency

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced joining a coalition of 23 attorneys general in submitting an amicus brief in National Treasury Employees Union v. Vought, a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s efforts to dismantle the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). Earlier this week, Attorney General Bonta submitted an amicus brief in another case, Mayor and City Council of Baltimore v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. In both briefs, the attorneys general argue that the shuttering of the CFPB would cause catastrophic harm to consumer protections nationwide, leaving state agencies with the sole responsibility to protect consumers from conduct regulated by the CFPB.
 
“The Trump Administration’s takeover of the CFPB is an effort to destroy the federal agency responsible for protecting American families from being exploited by big banks and payday lenders. Eliminating the only federal agency with oversight over big banks puts everyday consumers at higher risk for financial losses, and places higher demands on states like California,” said Attorney General Bonta. “From bank overdraft fees and credit card late fees to medical debt on credit reports, the CFPB has actively worked to make the lives of everyday people better — its loss will have devastating and deep implications for California, and the financial well-being of households across the nation."
 
Background
 
After examining the fallout of the 2008 financial crisis, Congress concluded the crisis resulted in part from the failure of federal banking and other regulators to address significant consumer protection issues detrimental to both consumers and the safety and soundness of the banking system. In direct response to these events, Congress established the CFPB and tasked it with enforcing numerous federal consumer protection statutes and enacting regulations to further these efforts. For over a decade, the CFPB has served as an invaluable partner to state attorneys general and state banking regulators, both by working to protect consumers against fraudulent and abusive practices and by advancing a fair and level playing field in consumer financial markets by issuing regulations under federal law. 
 
In the last month, the Trump Administration has taken a series of actions intended to debilitate the CFPB, including issuing a suspension of work across the agency, terminating probationary employees, and announcing a decision not to draw additional funding from the Federal Reserve. These actions appear to be part of a unilateral effort to permanently shut down the agency, including programs and operations mandated by federal law. 
 
In the brief, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the attorneys general argue the dismantling of the CFPB will cause irreparable harm to consumers and the states’ own consumer protection enforcement efforts, leave no oversight over large national banks, and will rapidly and substantially increase the burden on state agencies to protect consumers from conduct regulated by the CFPB. The loss of the CFPB’s partnership has concrete and widespread implications: from the sharing of complaints and trend data, to providing training, to partnering on joint investigations and litigations, the CFPB has been a force multiplier for California’s consumer protection efforts.
 
In filing the brief, Attorney General Bonta joins the attorneys general of New York, New Jersey, the District of Columbia, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin. 

A copy of the brief can be found here. 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today released a statement after the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York's issuance of a preliminary injunction blocking the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing Americans’ personal and private information maintained by the U.S. Treasury Department.

“We are pleased the court granted our request to further halt the Elon Musk-led DOGE from accessing millions of Americans’ private and sensitive data,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Californians can breathe a sigh of relief knowing the California Department of Justice is going to the mat for them and standing up against the Trump Administration’s chilling overreach of power.”  

Background

On February 7, Attorney General Bonta joined a coalition of 19 attorneys general in filing a lawsuit seeking to block DOGE from accessing sensitive Treasury Department material, including millions of Americans’ bank account and social security numbers. Hours after filing the lawsuit, the court responded by granting a temporary restraining order barring DOGE’s access to the Treasury Department’s payment systems and information. Today’s preliminary injunction keeps those restrictions in place pending further order of the court.

Since Inauguration Day, DOGE has infiltrated executive agencies with the goal of eliminating federal funding, services, and personnel. Starting last month, there were reports of billionaire Elon Musk and his DOGE associates gaining an unprecedented level of access to vital payment systems of the U.S Treasury.

The Treasury Department payment systems — managed by the Bureau of the Fiscal Service (BFS) — are responsible for trillions of dollars in U.S. government payments. Millions of Americans rely on the support of these payments for services like health care, childcare, and other essential programs, including Social Security benefits, Medicare benefits, veterans benefits, salaries for federal employees, and tax refunds. The Treasury Department’s payment systems are critical, sensitive, and incredibly vital. Given their critical importance to U.S. government operations, these systems have been highly regulated and tightly guarded — but with the election of Donald Trump, are no longer safe. 

In their complaint, the attorneys general allege the Trump Administration has no constitutional, statutory, or regulatory authority to widen access to the BFS payment system for political appointees or special government employees, including members of DOGE. 

A copy of the court's order can be found here.

Co-leads coalition of 18 attorneys general in filing amicus brief to support plaintiffs in PFLAG v. Trump 

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today co-led a coalition of 18 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland supporting the motion for a preliminary injunction sought by Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG), GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBTQ+ Equality, and individual patients and their families in their lawsuit against the Trump Administration. On February 4, 2025, PFLAG challenged President Trump’s Executive Orders 14168 and 14187 targeting transgender individuals by stating that gender identity was a “false” idea and by attempting to strip federal funding from institutions that provide life-saving gender affirming care for young people under the age of 19. The attorneys general argue that these actions blatantly and unlawfully discriminate against transgender youth based on their identity, and urge the Court to grant PFLAG’s motion for a preliminary injunction. 

“Health care decisions, including gender-affirming care, should be made by patients, families, and doctors, free from political interference,” said Attorney General Bonta. “As we continue to face relentless attacks on transgender rights, my office remains unwavering in our commitment to defending the rights of transgender individuals as they seek to live their lives as their authentic selves. Alongside attorneys general nationwide, I am proud to submit this amicus brief today in defense of the law and against the federal government’s unlawful, hate-mongering attempts to strip away the right to access gender-affirming care.”

The states submitting today’s amicus brief have enacted their own laws, policies, and protections for transgender residents, including transgender youth under the age of 19. California law, including the Unruh Civil Rights Act, Civil Code section 51, and Government Code section 11135, prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. Electing to refuse services to a class of individuals based on their protected status, such as withholding services from transgender individuals based on their gender identity or their diagnosis of gender dysphoria, while offering such services to cisgender individuals, is discrimination. 

In today’s amicus brief, the attorneys general argue that there is considerable medical evidence showing that gender-affirming care improves the health outcomes for individuals with gender dysphoria, a medical condition characterized by significant distress that occurs when an individual’s gender identity differs from their sex assigned at birth. Denying this care can have tragic consequences on patients’ physical and mental well-being. A recent study conducted by the University of Washington found that in individuals ages 13-20, receiving gender-affirming care was associated with 60% lower odds of moderate to severe depression and 73% lower odds of having suicidal thoughts over a 12-month period. 

The attorneys general also argue that the Administration’s Executive Orders have sown chaos and confusion among gender-affirming care providers and caused anxiety and fear among transgender youth and their families. The Trevor Project, which provides confidential counseling to LGBTQ+ youth, reported a 700% increase in access to its crisis services since the Presidential election and a 46% increase in volume following Inauguration Day. In the immediate aftermath of the Executive Orders, facilities across the country halted gender-affirming care for young people, citing fears of losing federal funding for healthcare unrelated to gender-affirming care.    

While gender-affirming care remains available in California, the Executive Orders have undeniably and unacceptably scared providers and patients here and across the country. Shortly after PFLAG filed their lawsuit, Attorney General Bonta joined 14 other attorneys general in issuing a statement reaffirming their commitment to protecting access to gender-affirming care, reminding providers that federal courts have stopped the Administration from withholding federal funding from institutions, including ones that provide gender-affirming care, and making clear that no federal law prohibits or criminalizes gender-affirming care.  

In submitting this brief, which is co-led by California Attorney General Rob Bonta, Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell, and Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown, are the attorneys general from Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. 

A copy of the amicus brief can be found here. 

Gutting of CFPB creates a gap in regulation greater than before the 2008 financial crisis

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today joined a coalition of 23 attorneys general in submitting an amicus brief in Mayor and City Council of Baltimore v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s efforts to dismantle the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). In the brief, the attorneys general argue that the shuttering of the CFPB would cause catastrophic harm to consumer protections nationwide, leaving state agencies with the sole responsibility to protect consumers. 

“The CFPB was created to protect consumers from being taken advantage of by corporations. As the backbone of federal consumer financial protections, the CFPB is a force multiplier for California’s consumer protection efforts, working to protect consumers from fraud, abuse, and unfair business practices and returning over $20 billion to Americans since its creation,” said Attorney General Bonta. “The Trump Administration’s takeover of the CFPB is an effort to destroy the agency responsible for overseeing the mortgage markets, stopping predatory debt collectors, and preventing American families from being exploited by big banks and payday lenders. From sharing complaints and trend data, to providing training, and partnering on joint investigations and litigations, the loss of CFPB’s partnership has devastating and deep implications for California and households across the nation." 

After examining the fallout of the 2008 financial crisis, Congress concluded the crisis resulted in part from the failure of federal banking and other regulators to address significant consumer protection issues detrimental to both consumers and the safety and soundness of the banking system. In direct response to these events, Congress established the CFPB and tasked it with enforcing numerous federal consumer protection statutes and enacting regulations to further these efforts. For over a decade, the CFPB has served as an invaluable partner to state attorneys general and state banking regulators, both by working to protect consumers against fraudulent and abusive practices and by advancing a fair and level playing field in consumer financial markets by issuing regulations under federal law. 

In the last month, the Trump Administration has taken a series of actions intended to debilitate the CFPB, including issuing a suspension of work across the agency, terminating probationary employees, and announcing a decision not to draw additional funding from the Federal Reserve. These actions appear to be part of a unilateral effort to permanently shut down the agency, including programs and operations mandated by federal law. 

In the brief, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, the attorneys general argue the haphazard and chaotic shuttering of the CFPB: 

• Has caused and will continue to cause irreparable harm to the wellbeing of consumers and the states’ own enforcement efforts. 
• Leaves no oversight over large national banks. 
• Rapidly and substantially increases the burden on state agencies to protect consumers. 

For example, one of the most significant losses associated with the CFPB’s shuttering is the loss of their consumer-complaint system, which fields approximately 25,000 consumer complaints about financial products and services each week. This system allows the CFPB to identify and prioritize complaints where a consumer is at risk of imminent home foreclosure and then refer consumers to housing counselors to help them avoid losing their home.

Additionally, the CFPB is the sole federal regulator of nonbank mortgage lenders, and the sole federal entity that is statutorily authorized to supervise and bring enforcement actions against national banks in connection with “abusive” practices. Since 2022, California has referred nearly 4,000 consumers to the CFPB in circumstances where the Bureau is best positioned to provide the assistance needed. 

The CFPB’s sudden gutting also means that there will be essentially no oversight of very large banks, such as JPMorgan and Wells Fargo, for their compliance with consumer financial-protection laws. Very large financial institutions that compete with state-chartered banks will have the freedom to loosen their regulatory compliance and profit accordingly — to the detriment of consumers and competing banks and credit unions — as was seen in the years leading up to the 2008 financial crisis. 

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

A copy of the amicus brief can be found here.