The Trump appointed judge orders that Trump “re -financing Spigots to”

The Trump administration did not hide Hate The exchange of funds authorized by Congress under Law of reducing inflation Party infrastructure law. But on Tuesday, a federal judge issued to request “The agencies are required to re -fund Spigots.”

During the reign of President Donald Trump, federal agencies used his executive orders to justify the blocking of granting contracts and contracts approved by Congress, many of which were already granted. But the American boycott judge, Mary McLeroy, appointed by Trump during his first term, said that the administration’s actions “were neither reasonable nor a reasonable explanation.”

“The broad forces in which there is no (administration and budget office), the Council (the National Economic Council), and the five agencies that confirm anywhere in the federal law.”

In addition to the Office of Administration and Budget and the National Economic Council, five federal agencies are prosecuted by many prosecutors. For example, a lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency is filed by the childhood work project, which has received $ 500,000 to combat childhood poisoning in Rod Island. Other agencies include agriculture, energy, housing, urban and internal development.

This issue is separate from another issue, in which the Trump administration Tell Citibank to freeze Hundreds of millions of dollars of money that was already held in non -profit banking accounts. In this case, a federal judge said that the Trump administration – specifically the Environmental Protection Agency – acted in a “arbitrary and volatile” manner when completing the contracts with three non -profit organizations. The judge issued a temporary restriction order that requires the Environmental Protection Agency and Citibank to give non -profit organizations the ability to access money in their accounts.

McLOY admitted that the Trump administration is part of its rights to direct the country in a specific direction, although there are borders.

The judge wrote: “The court wants to be clear to the crystal: it has consequences and the president has the right to forget his agenda. The judiciary is not and he cannot decide whether his policies are sound.”

“But when the federal courts are constitutionally required – meaning that, under the law, we have no choice but to do this – they are cases about the procedure” (or their absence) that the government follows in trying to enact these policies. “

Many non -profit companies and organizations have intercepted through the court files to control the Trump administration on the departments and executive sub -agencies to retract the effects of legislation approved by Congress and their signing in law under the previous administration.

Here, Mcelroy agrees with the plaintiffs. “The agencies do not have an unlimited authority to increase the president’s agenda, nor have it no authority unrestricted in the knee strings to some extent legal approved by Congress during the previous administration.”