ACLJ Files Three Amicus Briefs Across the Country in One Day Defending President Trump’s Authority To Implement a Conservative Agenda

On Wednesday we filed three briefs in courts across the country in crucial federal cases, defending the President’s authority to govern and carry out his agenda for the good of our nation. The reckless judicial overreach we’re seeing is a direct assault on the Constitution’s original design. This isn’t just legal overreach; it’s lawfare – an attempt to weaponize the courts to undermine the presidency itself. We’re fighting back.

First, we filed an amicus brief in federal court in Rhode Island. A federal judge there issued an order requiring the Trump Administration to restore all frozen funds. He issued a broad order requiring the Trump Administration to continue to spend funds, regardless of the constitutional separation of powers and the President’s authority to ensure that federal funds are spent in accordance with the law. A number of far-Left state attorneys general are challenging temporary funding pauses. Our brief presents two key arguments:

First, the states’ lawsuit is moot because it challenges a now-rescinded OMB [Office of Management and Budget] memo. The states cannot use this lawsuit as a backdoor attempt to challenge all funding pauses, including those implemented by separate Executive orders not targeted in their complaint.

Second, even before its rescission, the OMB memo simply directed agencies to analyze their programs and pause funding only where legally permissible and where implicated by specific Executive orders. That kind of direction is not the kind of specific final decision that anyone can challenge in court.

This case has significant implications for protecting taxpayer dollars and enforcing the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits federal funding of abortion. The President’s January 24, 2025, Executive order “Enforcing the Hyde Amendment” aims to end the Biden Administration’s embedding of “forced taxpayer funding of elective abortions in a wide variety of Federal programs.” We’re asking the court to deny the states’ motion for preliminary injunction and allow the Executive branch to fulfill its constitutional duty to ensure federal funds are spent in accordance with the law, including, in particular, the Hyde Amendment.

We have also filed two other amicus briefs. In New York – in a federal lawsuit also brought by a number of states – a judge issued an order barring federal officials from accessing Treasury data. We filed an amicus brief in that district court case, and we filed a third amicus in the district court in D.C. in a case about the same issue. Our briefs highlight the President’s constitutional authority to oversee Executive branch operations.

In a shocking overreach, plaintiffs in these cases are attempting to prevent the Executive branch from accessing its own information needed to carry out constitutional duties. Our brief forcefully argues that such unprecedented interference would violate the fundamental principles of separation of powers that have been respected since our nation’s founding.

Key points from our brief:

1. The Constitution establishes a unitary Executive branch under the President’s authority, with all Executive power vested in the President as head of the Executive branch.

2. Since 1789, Presidents have maintained direct oversight of Treasury operations without serious challenge – a practice that demonstrates the Founders’ intent for Executive control over financial administration.

3. The President cannot fulfill his constitutional duties to faithfully execute the laws if denied access to Executive branch information.

4. Treasury’s core functions of managing government finances and implementing fiscal policy are quintessentially Executive responsibilities requiring presidential oversight.

As we argue in our brief, quoting Alexander Hamilton in The Federalist Papers, the administration of public funds and oversight of their disbursement are Executive tasks carried out by officials who serve as “assistants or deputies of the chief magistrate.” This principle remains as vital today as it was at our nation’s founding.

The ACLJ continues to defend crucial constitutional principles in courts across America. We’re asking the courts to deny these attempts to undermine presidential authority and maintain the proper constitutional balance of powers established by our Founders. These cases represent yet another example of how the ACLJ fights to protect the Constitution’s careful design for our government’s structure and operation.

UPDATE 02.14.2024: We just filed a fourth amicus brief in these cases – this time in federal district court in D.C. against the block on President Trump's funding freeze.