Federal Accountability

OAKLAND — Co-leading a coalition of 22 attorneys general and the state of Pennsylvania, California Attorney General Rob Bonta today filed a motion for a preliminary injunction to block the Trump Administration from enforcing the “Defund Provision” within the recently enacted federal budget bill (“Big Beautiful Bill”). The Defund Provision excludes certain health centers, including Planned Parenthood health centers, from receiving federal Medicaid reimbursements. Among other things, these centers provide essential healthcare services to low-income patients, such as cancer screenings, testing and treatment of sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and birth control. After filing suit over the Defund Provision on July 29, 2025, the coalition is now asking the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts to grant its motion for a preliminary injunction because the States are likely to succeed on the merits, the Defund Provision would result in irreparable harm to the States if allowed to stay in effect, and the balance of equities and the public interest favor the States. In a related lawsuit, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. v. Kennedy, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit issued an unpublished order on September 11, 2025 granting the Trump Administration’s request to allow the Defund Provision to go into effect. 

“For years and years, the attacks on Planned Parenthood have been relentless. With the Defund Provision in President Trump’s so-called ‘Big Beautiful Bill,’ those attacks have escalated to an all-out assault. Let me be clear: Our coalition’s support for Planned Parenthood and other health centers providing essential reproductive healthcare is resolute,” said Attorney General Rob Bonta. “We are asking the court to grant our motion for a preliminary injunction because the stakes have never been higher. These centers provide critical healthcare services for low-income patients across the country — our states, and the health of our people, will suffer immensely if the Defund Provision is allowed to remain in effect.” 

“Right now, access to abortion and reproductive health care in California hangs in the balance. All 109 Planned Parenthood health centers in California are currently prohibited from being reimbursed for any of the services they provide to patients on Medi-Cal. As a trusted provider in the Medi-Cal program, Planned Parenthood health centers continue to provide care to these patients, but given over 80% of Planned Parenthood patients in California are Medi-Cal enrollees, this is unsustainable and greatly jeopardizes sexual and reproductive health care access in the state,” said Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California CEO and President Jodi Hicks. “If the Defund Provision remains in effect, Planned Parenthood health centers in California will be forced to reduce services, scale back hours, or close their doors — cutting off access to live-saving health care services for our most vulnerable communities. As we continue to weather these attacks by the Trump Administration, PPAC is grateful to California Attorney General Rob Bonta and other state attorneys general for their ongoing efforts to halt this devastating federal defund and ensure people can continue to access the essential health care they need and deserve, including at Planned Parenthood health centers.” 

The coalition’s lawsuit alleges that the Defund Provision violates the U.S. Constitution’s Spending Clause due to the lack of clear notice and the inclusion of unconstitutional provisions. Specifically, it is evident that Planned Parenthood health centers are the clear target of the Defund Provision, but Congress failed to adequately define (1) the full scope of providers that qualify as “prohibited entities” and (2) the timing of the prohibition on federal reimbursements to such entities. Moreover, the Defund Provision constitutes a change that the States could not have anticipated when joining Medicaid. Throughout the sixty-year history of Medicaid, States — not the federal government — have determined whether providers “qualify” for the Medicaid program.  

In its motion for a preliminary injunction, the coalition underscores that:

• The Defund Provision is already impacting the States through increased administrative burdens and compliance costs. For example, the States have had to restructure their claims-processing infrastructure to try to accommodate the Defund Provision’s requirements.  
• The Defund Provision’s ambiguity has resulted in the States having to field questions from providers and draft guidance in an attempt to address the ambiguities.  
• The Defund Provision will also result in significant increases in the States’ healthcare expenses. For example, treatment for later-stage breast and cervical cancer is much more expensive than screenings and early or preventative treatment. Further, Planned Parenthood treats a high volume of patients, and other healthcare centers not targeted by the Defund Provision will not be able to absorb the influx of patients. 

In filing the motion for a preliminary injunction, Attorney General Bonta — along with the attorneys general of Connecticut and New York — lead the attorneys general of Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia, as well as the state of Pennsylvania. 

A copy of the motion for a preliminary injunction can be found here. In support of its motion for a preliminary injunction, the coalition also submitted a declaration from Megan L. Kavanaugh, Principal Research Scientist at the Guttmacher Institute. That declaration can be found here.

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta secured a temporary restraining order late yesterday blocking the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) from cutting off California and other states’ funding to administer the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) while briefing on their litigation continues. SNAP is a federally funded, state-administered program that provides billions of dollars in food assistance to tens of millions of low-income families across the country each year. In July 2025, Attorney General Bonta led a multistate coalition in suing USDA, arguing that its demand that states turn over SNAP data violates multiple federal privacy laws and the U.S. Constitution. The coalition later asked the court for emergency relief after USDA threatened to withhold crucial administrative funding that states depend on to run the SNAP program if the states do not turn over the demanded data.

“No Californian should have to choose between putting food on the table and allowing their personal, private data to be fed into the President’s mass surveillance database,” said Attorney General Bonta. “That is not what Californians agreed to when they signed up for the SNAP program. This court order is a first step in blocking the Trump Administration’s latest effort to bully states into breaking the law and breaking public trust. We will not turn over our residents’ personal, private data to be misused by this Administration.”

A copy of the order is available here.

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today issued a statement on the decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts to deny the Trump Administration’s motion to dismiss in State of California v. Donald Trump. On April 3, 2025, Attorney General Bonta co-led a coalition of 19 attorneys general in filing a lawsuit against the Trump Administration over Executive Order No. 14248 (Executive Order), an unconstitutional, antidemocratic, and un-American attempt to impose sweeping voting restrictions. On June 13, 2025, the coalition secured a preliminary injunction blocking unlawful provisions of the Executive Order. The preliminary injunction remains in effect following today’s decision. 

“I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: Donald Trump is not king. He cannot unilaterally impose voting restrictions across the country — that’s why my fellow attorneys general and I took him to court earlier this year,” said Attorney General Bonta. “I’m pleased that the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts has now emphatically rejected the Trump Administration’s effort to dismiss our lawsuit. We continue to believe in the strength of our case and remain as committed as ever to protecting the right to vote.” 

A copy of the decision can be found here.

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today filed an amicus brief in support of D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb’s lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s unlawful deployment of National Guard troops to the District of Columbia. Attorney General Bonta and Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown led a coalition of 22 attorneys general in asserting that the deployment of National Guard troops without the consent of D.C. is unlawful, unconstitutional, and undemocratic. Domestic use of the military has long been recognized as antithetical to American values. While California and D.C. were the first places subjected to unlawful federalized deployments, President Trump has made clear that this is the beginning — not the end — of the military occupation of American cities. In the brief, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition urge the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to grant a preliminary injunction and make clear that the Constitution prohibits the use of soldiers as local law enforcement. 

“The President continues to use National Guard servicemembers to carry out his own personal political agenda — recklessly tearing down two-and-a-half-centuries of guardrails that have prevented the military from occupying American streets,” said Attorney General Bonta. “This is not a President who cares about public safety; instead, President Trump has undermined it at every turn, sending National Guard troops with no training to engage in civilian law enforcement and pulling them away from their work fighting wildfires and engaging in counter-drug enforcement at the border. I am proud to stand with 22 attorneys general in support of D.C.’s lawsuit, as my office continues to fight the unlawful federalization and deployment of military troops in California.”

The experience of California, as the first state to experience President Trump’s deployment of the National Guard without its Governor’s consent, serves as a warning of the harm caused by a continuous military presence in a state. For more than three months, federalized California National Guard troops have been deployed in California’s communities. During this time, the troops’ presence has stoked fear among Californians, causing the public to stay home, fail to report for work, and avoid areas where the military is deployed. The use of federalized National Guard troops has damaged trust between local law enforcement and the community, as troops have been tasked with civilian law enforcement and were widely present during immigration raids in the first few weeks of their deployment. These troops were diverted away from essential state functions, like fighting wildfires. In June 2025, the majority of California’s Guard’s specialized fire crews were diverted from their wildfire-fighting task force in the midst of peak fire season and instead deployed into the streets of Los Angeles. 

With California’s recent experience as a lesson, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition argue that:

• Using the military for local law enforcement, as the President has done in the D.C., upsets the careful balance between civilian and military authority set forth in the Constitution.
• The deployment of National Guard troops infringes on the police powers reserved to States and localities. The Constitution establishes a federal government of limited, enumerated powers — general police power is not among them.  
• National Guard troops are not prepared to engage in civilian law enforcement, lacking training in criminal procedure, civil rights, criminal investigation, and de-escalation. This introduces complications and dangers to both the public and the troops engaging with them. 
• States need the National Guard to be available for vital natural disaster and security functions.

Attorney General Bonta is committed to holding President Trump and his administration accountable for overreaching their authority under the law and infringing on Californians’ constitutional rights. In June, Attorney General Bonta and Governor Newsom filed a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s unlawful orders to federalize the California National Guard and utilize National Guard troops and the Marines for civilian law enforcement in Los Angeles in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act. That same week, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted California emergency relief, blocking the federalization order and returning command of the California National Guard to Governor Newsom; that order is currently stayed by the Ninth Circuit pending appeal. In August, the Attorney General’s Office presented evidence of Posse Comitatus Act violations during a three-day trial before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The Court subsequently granted a permanent injunction enjoining the Trump Administration from engaging in the same or similar activity in the future. The Court’s order is temporarily paused while the Ninth Circuit considers the federal government’s motion for a stay.

Attorneys General Bonta and Brown lead the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaiʻi, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin in filing the brief. 

A copy of the amicus brief is available here. 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today secured a preliminary injunction blocking the Trump Administration from imposing cruel new restrictions on access to public benefit programs based on immigration status while litigation continues. Programs include Head Start, childcare services for low-income people, adult education, mental health and substance use disorder programs, and shelters for at-risk youth and domestic violence survivors, among others. After filing a lawsuit in July 2025, the multistate coalition had subsequently secured an agreement temporarily preventing the Trump Administration from implementing various agency notices significantly expanding federal public benefit ineligibility based on immigration status before today, September 10, 2025. 

“With today’s decision, vital education, nutrition, and health programs like Head Start — and the families who rely on their services — can breathe a sigh of relief,” said Attorney General Bonta. “The Trump Administration continues to pull the rug out from under California families just trying to get by, but we’re fighting back. We’re grateful that a district court has put a stop to this cruel new directive while our litigation continues.” 

The decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island ensures that millions of families can continue to access critical services without fear of denial or disruption while our litigation continues. With this ruling, the court acknowledges that the Trump Administration likely violated the Administrative Procedure Act and the Constitution by issuing sweeping new mandates without lawful rulemaking, grossly misreading the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, and failing to consider the devastating impacts on states and communities.  

A copy of the court's order is available here. 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta and Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell today co-led a coalition of 22 attorneys general in submitting a comment letter opposing the Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA) proposed federal rule that would eliminate veterans’ and their families’ access to abortion care. In 2022, the Biden Administration implemented the “Reproductive Health Services” Rule (the Rule), which currently allows veterans and their survivors and dependents to access abortion services at VA health care centers in situations where the patient’s life or health is threatened and in cases of self-reported rape or incest. The Rule also permits veterans and their survivors and dependents to access abortion counseling at VA health centers. After the Trump Administration indicated it was reviewing the Rule and held meetings with other stakeholders on the Rule, a coalition of attorneys general — including the Office of Attorney General Bonta — met with VA officials and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on April 8, 2025 to express why rolling back the Rule would cause harm to veterans and their families. On August 4, 2025, the Trump Administration published a proposed rule to formally undo the Biden Administration’s Rule. The comment letter is submitted in response to the VA’s invitation for public comment.  

“Earlier this year, my fellow attorneys general and I urged the Trump Administration to protect access to abortion care for veterans and their families in cases of rape, incest, and when the life or health of the woman is at risk. We also urged the Trump Administration to protect access to abortion counseling. Despite our commonsense positions, the Trump Administration has decided to continue its relentless attacks on reproductive healthcare,” said Attorney General Bonta. “As I have said before, medical decisions should be made by patients and their doctors — free from political interference. I’m proud to be co-leading my fellow attorneys general in calling on the Trump Administration to withdraw its proposed rule, which is both extreme and unjustified by any legal rationale.” 

On September 2, 2022, in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade, the Biden Administration’s VA announced the interim version of the Rule. On October 11, 2022, Attorney General Bonta led a coalition of 23 attorneys general in filing a comment letter supporting the VA’s efforts to increase reproductive freedom. After receiving public comment, the VA finalized the Rule on March 4, 2024. Since the Dobbs decision, at least 19 states have banned or restricted abortion care, while others are still proposing new restrictions.  

In the letter, the attorneys general write that: 

• The proposed rule presents an unclear standard as to when, if at all, VA physicians can provide abortion care. Specifically, the proposed rule’s preamble insists that it will allow VA physicians to provide lifesaving care — in circumstances “when a physician certifies that the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term” — while the proposed regulatory text bans abortion care for veterans entirely. Generally, where there is a discrepancy between the preamble and the regulatory text, the regulatory text controls. In addition, to the extent that the VA carves out an exception for the lives of pregnant survivors and dependents, it fails to set out a process by which individuals may take advantage of the exception.
• The proposed rule is extreme in its formulation and is out of step with existing abortion exceptions on the state and federal level. Although exceptions themselves are problematic and often difficult to administer, the VA’s proposed changes would mark a substantial and inhumane departure from decades of policy protecting the health and lives of pregnant patients and the autonomy of pregnant patients who have experienced rape and incest.
• The proposed rule is inadequately justified. It falsely claims that the VA does not have legal authority to provide abortion care, obfuscates other federal abortion policy in order to establish congressional intent for a VA abortion ban where there is none, and relies on political considerations instead of medical ones. 

Joining Attorney General Bonta in sending the comment letter are the attorneys general of Massachusetts, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and the District of Columbia. 

A copy of the comment letter can be found here.

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta, leading a multistate coalition along with New York Attorney General Letitia James, filed an amicus brief opposing a new federal policy that mandates indefinite detention of many undocumented immigrants without the opportunity for a bond hearing. In a brief filed in Bautista v. Noem, the coalition challenges the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) unprecedented reinterpretation of immigration law, arguing it violates due process and federal statutes, and inflicts widespread harm on families, communities, and state economies. 

“The Trump Administration has created a mass deportation apparatus built around the abduction and incarceration of immigrants,” said Attorney General Bonta. “It’s inhumane — and illegal. We’re talking about individuals who have lived and worked in the U.S. for years, who have had families here and become vital parts of their communities. They deserve to be treated with respect, and they have the right to the due process afforded to them by the Constitution.”  

For decades, immigrants living in the U.S. who were placed in removal proceedings had the right to request a bond hearing — a chance to argue for their release while their immigration case was pending. DHS’s new policy eliminates that right for those who entered the country without inspection, mandating their indefinite detention regardless of individual circumstances. Many of these individuals have lived in the U.S. for years and now face confinement in often overcrowded, unsafe, and unsanitary facilities for months or even years. As DHS expands its enforcement efforts, millions of additional immigrants could be subjected to mandatory detention under this policy. 

More than nine million U.S. citizens, including over four million children, live with at least one undocumented family member. Studies show that the detention of a parent significantly increases the risk of depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder in children, and deepens economic instability for entire households. Fear of detention already deters immigrant families from seeking health care, food assistance, and even reporting crimes, undermining both public safety and public health. The attorneys general argue that the mandatory detention policy only exacerbates this chilling effect.

Undocumented immigrants also constitute nearly five percent of the U.S. workforce and play critical roles in industries such as agriculture and construction. In 2023, undocumented-led households paid nearly $90 billion in taxes and contributed almost $300 billion in consumer spending. Attorney General Bonta and the coalition argue that unnecessarily detaining these workers disrupts the labor force and undermines local and state economies. The attorneys general also argue this policy will come at a substantial cost to taxpayers. In 2024, immigration detention cost U.S. taxpayers $3.4 billion – roughly $152 per detainee per day. By contrast, DHS’s own Alternatives to Detention program costs less than $4.20 per day and is equally effective in ensuring court appearances. The attorneys general argue that DHS’s shift away from these cost-effective alternatives wastes taxpayer dollars while delivering no added benefit.

The attorneys general also emphasize that indefinite detention severely limits detainees’ ability to access legal representation, particularly when they are transferred to remote facilities far from their families and attorneys. This drastically reduces their chances of obtaining legal relief, even when they are eligible to remain in the country. In addition to being inhumane, denying individuals the opportunity for a bond hearing contradicts longstanding legal precedent and fundamental due process protections. The coalition emphasizes that individualized assessments are standard in both civil and criminal proceedings, and immigrants should not be treated differently simply because of their legal status.

The attorneys general urge the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California to grant partial summary judgment for the plaintiffs and strike down DHS’s unlawful policy.

Earlier this year, Attorney General Bonta released the California Department of Justice’s fourth report on immigration detention facilities operating in California where noncitizens are detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The report is intended to provide members of the public and policymakers with critical information about the conditions that people in civil immigration detention in California are subjected to. A copy of the report is available here. A copy of the executive summary is also available in Spanish here. 

Attorney General Bonta and Attorney General James are joined by the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawai'i, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and the District of Columbia in filing the amicus brief. 

A copy of the amicus brief is available here. 

On August 5, 2025, the Trump Administration ordered the National Guard to be federalized and deployed for an additional 90 days

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta and Governor Gavin Newsom today asked a court to block the Trump Administration’s order federalizing and deploying 300 members of California’s National Guard for an additional 90 days and to order the Trump Administration to return control of the California National Guard to Governor Newsom. Long before the 60-day timeframe of the original deployment order had expired, the sporadic episodes of civil unrest that the Trump Administration relied on as shaky justification for the federalization of these troops had abated. They have not since reoccurred. Despite this, on August 5, 2025, the Trump Administration issued a new order to federalize and deploy 300 remaining California National Guard troops. If allowed to stand, this new deployment order would ensure that California’s residents will remain under a form of military occupation until November 5 — through Election Day. 

“The Trump Administration continues to hold our National Guard servicemembers hostage as part of an unprecedented attempt to militarize American streets,” said Attorney General Bonta. “The initial federalization and deployment of these troops was unjustified — their redeployment for an additional 90 days is absurd. We’re asking the court to block implementation of this latest order, and we are confident that given the facts — or lack thereof — underpinning this order, the court will agree.”

“The timing of Trump’s extension of the National Guard soldiers isn’t coincidental — he’s holding onto soldiers through Election Day. There was never a need and there is not a need now for soldiers to be deployed against their communities,” said Governor Newsom. “The federal government hasn’t even tried to justify keeping the military in Los Angeles because they can’t. The reality is this — they want to continue their intimidation tactics to scare Californians into submission.” 

Since July 1, 2025, the Trump Administration has drawn down the use of federalized National Guard troops without issue until just 300 troops remained. Yet, without justification, on August 5, 2025, the Trump Administration issued a new order federalizing 300 National Guard troops for an additional 90 days. This order is neither supported by the law nor the facts. The Trump Administration cannot establish — and has not even attempted to establish — that there was an invasion, rebellion, or inability to execute federal law anywhere in California on August 5, 2025. 

During their initial deployment, National Guard troops participated in low-risk federal law enforcement operations in Los Angeles and communities over 100 miles away. Far from being deployed in response to threats to federal personnel or property, federal law enforcement officials routinely requested and received the assistance of federalized troops for operations as a “safety measure,” even if the military’s risk assessment showed that there was not any threat that would require military support. Moreover, these troops were often called on to engage in civilian law enforcement activities, in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act. In the first weeks of their deployment, a Trump Administration official estimated that federalized National Guard troops accompanied federal agents on up to 75% of immigration arrests.

In their motion, Attorney General Bonta and Governor Newsom ask the court to issue a preliminary injunction enjoining implementation of the Trump Administration’s August 5 deployment order and returning control of the California National Guard to Governor Newsom.

Attorney General Bonta is committed to holding President Trump and his administration accountable for overreaching their authority under the law and infringing on Californians’ constitutional rights. In June, Attorney General Bonta and Governor Newsom filed a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s unlawful orders to federalize the California National Guard and utilize National Guard troops and the Marines for civilian law enforcement in Los Angeles in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act. In August, the Attorney General’s Office presented evidence of Posse Comitatus Act violations during a three-day trial before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, and earlier today, that court granted an injunction permanently enjoining the Trump Administration from engaging in the same or similar activity in the future.

A copy of the motion for a preliminary injunction is available here. 

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today responded to a ruling by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California 1) finding that the Trump Administration’s use of federalized California National Guard troops and Marines for civilian law enforcement in Los Angeles violated the Posse Comitatus Act and 2) permanently enjoining the Trump Administration from engaging in the same or similar activity in the future. This includes, but is not limited to, engaging in arrests, apprehensions, searches, seizures, security patrols, traffic control, crowd control, riot control, evidence collection, interrogation, or acting as informants. The District Court’s order is stayed until September 12, 2025, at 12pm.

“Today’s ruling affirms that President Trump is not King, and the power of the executive is not boundless,” said Attorney General Bonta. “For more than two months, the President has engaged in political theater, using National Guard troops and Marines as pawns to further his anti-immigrant agenda. In doing so, he trampled on one of the very basic foundations of our democracy: That our military be apolitical and the activities of troops on U.S. soil be extremely limited to ensure civil liberties and protect against military overreach. I applaud the District Court for firmly rejecting the Trump Administration’s reckless interpretation of the Posse Comitatus Act and rebuking its unprecedented use of military troops for civilian law enforcement in California communities.” 

The Posse Comitatus Act is a law that Congress passed making it illegal to use the military for civilian law enforcement. The Act has deep roots in American tradition, going back to the founding of our country, when the British King used his military to police the Colonies. Over the course of a three-day trial last month, California showed and the District Court today affirmed that the Trump Administration, in its orders to the federalized California National Guard and Marines, violated the Posse Comitatus Act, finding that: 

• The Trump Administration is making direct, active use of military personnel to execute the law, including through the provision of armed perimeter support and blockades at numerous operations.  
• The Trump Administration’s use of the military to “bolster DHS and DEA operations and shows of force exercises regulatory, proscriptive, and compulsory power on the surrounding public, and [the military’s] participation in operations in numbers that match or outnumber law enforcement agents pervade the activities of those civilian agents.” 
• “PCA violations were part of a top-down, systemic effort by Defendants to use military troops to execute various sectors of federal law (the drug laws and the immigration laws at least) across hundreds of miles and over the course of several months—and counting. The instructions to train Task Force 51 on the purported constitutional exception and thereby excuse unlawful military conduct came 'all the way from the top' of the Department of Defense.”

A copy of the court’s order is available here. 

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today prevailed in preserving funding for AmeriCorps, an independent federal agency that engages Americans in meaningful community-based service by providing opportunities for more than 200,000 Americans to serve their communities every year. The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) agreed to release over $184 million in funding, including $11.5 million for California, that AmeriCorps plans to award to service programs across the country, following a multistate challenge. OMB’s attempted cuts threatened the survival of those programs and the well-being of those who depend on them. On July 23, Attorney General Bonta led a coalition in filing an amended lawsuit challenging OMB’s attempt to gut AmeriCorps programs. Today, when their response for these actions was due in Court, OMB and AmeriCorps instead agreed to fully release the previously withheld funds.  

"Once again, because of our lawsuit, the Trump Administration has backed down, reversed course and committed to release vital funding to our states," said Attorney General Bonta. "AmeriCorps volunteers represent the best of who we are as a country. The Trump Administration's senseless attack on AmeriCorps programs, which directly support communities across our state and nation, is just one part of its broader effort to dismantle our government and defund the programs and services it provides. But California will not stop holding this Administration accountable. We’re continuing to fight for — and win — full relief for Californians."

AmeriCorps supports national and state community service programs by funding and placing volunteers in local and national organizations that address critical community needs. Organizations rely on support from AmeriCorps to recruit, place, and supervise AmeriCorps members nationwide. In 2024, more than 6,150 California members served at least 1,200 locations, including schools, food banks, homeless shelters, health clinics, youth centers, veterans’ facilities, and other nonprofit and faith-based organizations. AmeriCorps invested more than $133 million in federal funding to California that same year to support cost-effective community solutions, working with local partners on the ground to help communities tackle their toughest challenges. This includes programs like:

• Prevent Child Abuse California, which hosts 65 AmeriCorps members who provide academic assistance, life skills, and financial literacy to hundreds of foster youths across 15 counties. 
• Partnership for Veterans and People Experiencing Homeless, which hosts 25 AmeriCorps members that provide housing services, job placement, and case management to veterans and homeless individuals in Santa Barbara County.
• Reading Partners California, which hosts 80 AmeriCorps members who recruit and manage approximately 1400 volunteers to provide one-on-one literacy tutoring to students at 58 low-income elementary schools.

On April 29, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition challenged the administration’s plans to eliminate nearly 90% of AmeriCorps’ workforce, abruptly cancel its contracts, and close $400 million worth of AmeriCorps-supported programs. In June, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition secured a court order reinstating hundreds of AmeriCorps programs that were unlawfully cancelled and barring AmeriCorps from making similar cuts without formal rulemaking. Despite this order, OMB withheld vast sums intended for outstanding service programs, threatening their survival and the wellbeing of those who depend on their services. 

The coalition subsequently filed an amended lawsuit adding OMB as a defendant and a motion for a preliminary injunction, asking for an order to stop OMB from withholding the relevant funds. The Trump Administration’s response was due yesterday, August 28, 2025. Rather than oppose the states’ motion, the Administration instead informed the Court that OMB would release all withheld AmeriCorps funds, totaling over $184 million, which AmeriCorps will distribute to programs nationwide, as quickly as possible.  

Attorney General Bonta, alongside the attorneys general of Maryland, Delaware, and Colorado, led the attorneys general of Arizona, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, the District of Columbia, as well as the states of Kentucky and Pennsylvania in filing the lawsuit.