Trump-Appointed Judge Blocks Trump Admin’s $11B Health Grant Cuts

Red stop sign against concrete wall background

A federal judge appointed by President Trump has temporarily blocked the Trump administration’s effort to cut $11 billion in public health funding, dealing a setback to the president’s budget priorities.

Key Takeaways

U.S. District Judge Mary McElroy temporarily halted the Trump administration’s plan to cut $11 billion in unspent pandemic health grants
23 states and Washington D.C. sued to maintain funding they say is critical for disease tracking, vaccine access, and health infrastructure
The administration argues the pandemic-era funds are “no longer necessary” since the health emergency has ended
Public health departments have already begun laying off staff and face significant financial losses without the funding
Pennsylvania’s Governor Josh Shapiro praised the injunction, noting the funds support elderly care and child immunization efforts

Trump-Appointed Judge Blocks Administration’s Health Funding Cuts

In a significant legal development, U.S. District Judge Mary McElroy has issued a temporary restraining order blocking the Trump administration from cutting more than $11 billion in public health funding previously allocated to states. Judge McElroy, who was appointed by President Trump in 2019 after initially being nominated by President Obama, sided with the 23 states and District of Columbia that filed the emergency lawsuit. The plaintiffs argued the funding cuts would cripple essential public health services across the country at a time when many health departments are still managing ongoing public health challenges.

The funding in question, distributed through grants and cooperative agreements, supports critical health initiatives including disease surveillance, vaccine distribution, mental health services, addiction treatment, and public health infrastructure improvements. Many states had already incorporated these funds into their budgets and operations, making the sudden termination particularly disruptive to health departments nationwide.

🚨🇺🇸 JUDGE BLOCKS $11B IN HEALTH FUNDING CUTS

A federal judge in Rhode Island said she will temporarily block the Trump administration from cutting $11 billion in public health funds.

The cuts, mostly tied to COVID-19, mental health, and substance abuse efforts, were challenged… https://t.co/JJQyljWctm pic.twitter.com/GADC438buJ

— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) April 4, 2025

Administration Argues Pandemic Funding No Longer Needed

The Trump administration has defended the funding cuts, stating that the money was specifically allocated for pandemic response and is no longer required. According to court documents, the administration’s position is clear: “Now that the pandemic is over, the grants and cooperative agreements are no longer necessary as their limited purpose has run out.” This rationale aligns with President Trump’s broader fiscal goals of reducing government spending and eliminating programs his administration views as unnecessary or outdated.

“Now that the pandemic is over, the grants and cooperative agreements are no longer necessary as their limited purpose has run out,” the Trump administration said.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Leslie Kane represented the administration during the hearing but was limited in her arguments due to time constraints. The Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the grant programs, faces significant pressure as the abrupt termination of funding on March 24 has already caused disruptions across multiple state health departments, with some already laying off staff and scaling back critical services.

States Report Immediate Public Health Impacts

The legal challenge highlights numerous examples of how the funding cuts threaten public health infrastructure. Arizona’s health department reported disruptions to its disease surveillance system, while other states emphasized the funding’s importance for combating current health threats including measles outbreaks. North Carolina and California officials warned of significant financial losses, with some public health departments already forced to lay off essential personnel.

“This massive and egregiously irresponsible cut of public health funding should put everyone on high alert to the depths this Administration is willing to go,” stated Rhode Island’s Attorney General Peter Neronha.

Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro celebrated the court’s decision, highlighting how the restored funding will support elderly care and childhood immunization efforts. The lawsuit involves a bipartisan group of states, including Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Washington, Wisconsin, and Washington, D.C.

Judge Signals States’ Strong Legal Position

During the hearing, Judge McElroy indicated her belief in the states’ legal argument, stating: “They make a case, a strong case, for the fact that they will succeed on the merits, so I’m going to grant the temporary restraining order.” This temporary block buys time for the states while the underlying legal challenge proceeds through the courts. The judge’s decision represents just one of several legal obstacles the Trump administration has faced in implementing its policy agenda across multiple fronts.

“As a result of taking the Administration to court, these dollars will now start flowing again,” Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro wrote on X.

New York Attorney General Letitia James has pledged to continue the legal battle, vowing to “fight to ensure states can provide the medical services Americans need.” The temporary restraining order will remain in effect while the court considers the broader merits of the case, setting up what could be a prolonged legal confrontation between the Trump administration and the states over federal health funding priorities and responsibilities.