Who runs this country the President or these judges?!?
In a controversial legal decision that could have major national implications, a federal judge has ruled against President Donald Trump’s administration in a battle over transportation funding and compliance requirements tied to diversity and immigration enforcement.
$4 Billion in Grants at Stake
The case involved the administration’s effort to withhold $4 billion in federal transportation grants from cities that refuse to align with key federal policies. At the center of the debate was an April memo issued by Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, which required grant recipients to both cooperate with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and adopt federally backed diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) standards.
The Trump administration argued these policies were necessary to ensure taxpayer dollars are used responsibly—supporting national security, law and order, and equal opportunity rooted in merit, not identity politics.
Liberal Cities Push Back in Court
The city of Denver, along with several left-leaning jurisdictions, filed suit claiming the requirements were politically motivated and legally unfounded. The court agreed—at least for now.
The judge issued a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of the new conditions, citing concerns that the executive branch was imposing rules not directly authorized by Congress, which could violate the constitutional separation of powers.
Denver Mayor Mike Johnston, a Democrat, hailed the decision, framing it as a victory for the city’s access to federal funding regardless of its immigration policies.
“We follow all laws—federal, state, and local—and we expect the White House to do the same,” Johnston said in a prepared statement.
Broader Legal Setback for the White House
This ruling comes amid a series of legal obstacles confronting the Trump administration. In a separate case, a federal judge ordered the reinstatement of AmeriCorps funding and the rehiring of thousands of workers, stating that the administration’s decision to cut the program violated existing law.
Together, these rulings underscore how liberal courts continue to challenge President Trump’s efforts to restore order, secure the border, and curb bloated federal programs.
Conservative Takeaway:
This is yet another example of unelected judges halting policies backed by millions of American voters. President Trump’s attempt to restore accountability in federal spending—by tying funding to cooperation with ICE and opposition to divisive DEI mandates—has now been delayed by activist rulings. The fight continues.
