Judge accuses Trump administration of discrimination against LGBTQ

This is such wonderful news!! Did you listen to/watch the hearing this morning OP? Memoli must have tire tracks on his back from being thrown under the bus by the bus by the government attorney.

Let’s hope the appeals court finds the same. Then it will of course go to SCOTUS.

The main point is Congress has the power of the purse. Trump cannot unilaterally say that science research focused on specific groups must be stopped

14th Amendment

New York Times article

R1 At the link below, you can access a database of Federal grants that were terminated and the keywords that were red flags (the “flagged_words” field in the listing details of grants). You don’t have to be a judge to see how targeted the terminations are. Grants are still being canceled as of today.

Biochemists can no longer put the term “trans” (e.g., trans-acetylated fatty acids) in their grants out of concern the searching algorithm will flag their grant for termination. That’s how ridiculous things have become.

There appear to be at least two states that have sued HHS and won, because one of my former colleagues got his terminated grant reinstated under the auspices of one of those lawsuits, even though he is not located in that state. The new Federal case decision, if it holds, will be even more far-reaching in getting grants reinstated.

The link does not conform to DL’s format expectations so here it is in a hopefully unrecognizable format:

grant-

watch

.us

R1 thanks. We got a COVID grant back based on an earlier lawsuit. Hoping this brings back all the others.

(R5!)

THIS IS NOT a fucking argument

R2 congress can and has forced admins to create advisory committees and has gone after program funding for programs congress does not like, etc etc. as you say they control the purse strings.. Congress could fund a Gay Men’s Health Office and provide funds for that office and require the admin to set up this , witch hunt , sorry I mean this GMHO.

But can courts force an admin to spend money on programs the admin considers a waste of funds or not needed? Especially when the admin is cutting a “ whole” lot of other programs that has nothing to do with gays or minorities.

Whole programs I worked in or on for decades disappeared at once. And everyone fired.

I’d love a lawyer who understands congressional and presidential and the courts power to weigh in if the courts can now step in and force the admin to spend $$ on programs now deemed wasteful or unneeded?

The judge saying he had no idea he had the authority to do this might be a clue?

What are you smoking R9? Doge loons like Rachel Riley and Big Balls come up with lists of grants to terminate based on control F searches looking for grants with words like black in them, Memoli spends less than a minute a grant checking the results and then NIH staff (the actual admins) are forced to terminate or be fired. Go read Michelle Bull’s testimony.

R10 are you the DL lesbian that signed on to work on a grant where you first signed that you agreed that marriage was strictly between a man and woman ? Or was that someone else?

or are you a lawyer that understands the power of an admin, courts, congress ?

I was asking what those who understand constitutional law think. This is not an argument nor an argument about whether this admin is gutting much of our “ entire” public health infrastructure including those addressing the gay community or minorities.

R11 I am not. That was someone else.

I am not a lawyer. But I work closely with lawyers and am occasionally consulted by them as a subject matter expert on NIH issues.

Did you read either of the lawsuits in the Young case or watch/listen to the hearing yesterday morning? I did. And it doesn’t require a lawyer or constitutional scholar to understand that when Congress incudes clear language in a funding bill that the funds must be used for purpose X that neither the executive branch nor the agency itself have the authority to define purpose X as not effectuating agency priorities.

[Quote] But can courts force an admin to spend money on programs the admin considers a waste of funds or not needed? Especially when the admin is cutting a “ whole” lot of other programs that has nothing to do with gays or minorities.

Yes, if targeting by the civil rights categories. And now, according to SCOTUS, being gay is one of those categories

R12 so you are not from Florida?

Because it was a Florida lesbian that worked in health related field that posted how she did attest and swore in writing that marriage was between a man and woman to get more state work. So it was not you?

I would still like to hear from people that know constitutional law . Because as I read the judges statements he made a ruling then added he was not sure he had the authority to make the ruling. Not usually a part of a legal finding in my non lawyer experience.

I am not now nor have I ever lived in Florida, although I have visited.

Please link to where you think you saw judge Young make that uncertainty statement. TIA

Just one example

Congress had allocated monies specifically for the HHS anti smoking office or program for decades and that program was entirely eliminated. To the glee and cheers of tobacco states that had been trying to kill that program for decades,.

Was that an illegal elimination of an office or program? Congress located the funds specifically for that program.

Somehow I doubt this is as simple as non lawyers non constitutional lawyers might make it seem.

R15 thanks :-)

I am sure that there’ll be a lawsuit about that R16 if there isn’t one already. The mass defunding of NIH grants started in March. The CDC tobacco defunding wasn’t until (maybe late) April. Here’s the tool I use to track the cases.

First amendment Fifth amendment Separation of powers Impoundment Act Violation of the Administrative Procedures Act

R18 thanks

The previous admins, dems and gop, requested funds specifically for an anti smoking office . ( migrant health as well) Those funds were approved by Congress.

Then a new admin decides it no longer wants that office and defunds it entirely,

I have a hard time seeing a court telling any admin they must rehire restore and refund that office. Being able to do that lets the courts micro manage or run the exec branch.

Congress I can see trying to hold the admin accountable . If they wanted to.

It’s obviously not all that cut and dry or the judge would have never said he was not sure he had the power to do what he had just done. It sounds more like a judicial protest than a firm ruling to me.

Interesting times for sure

R19 please link to where you are seeing Judge Young saying that he was unsure about anything. You keep repeating that, but it’s a mystery to me where you are getting that.

R20 as I read the thread intro , it’s very clear he said that and in the thread introduction above. And his claim in articles posted here where he stated that he had to do “something.” That sounds like a protest to me.

But “ uncertain he had the power.”

Now if he never said that I have no idea why it’s prominently stated he said it above.

The cancellations of the grants don’t reference the EOs so the EOs aren’t part of the ruling.