A federal judge in Boston has blocked the Trump administration from using a specific clause to implement billions in funding cuts. The decision came after 23 states filed a lawsuit claiming the administration was leveraging this clause to reduce funding for various programs, including crime prevention, food security, and scientific research.

U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani rejected the administration’s interpretation of the Termination Clause, highlighting that it lacks clear support from the text, contradicts the regulatory framework, and doesn’t align with rulemaking history. The clause, initially introduced in 2020 and revised in 2024, allows federal agents to terminate grants if they no longer meet program goals or agency priorities.

The states argued this language was being used, for the first time, by the Biden administration to cancel grants. New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport emphasized the impact on public safety and disaster preparedness, describing the ruling as a victory for state residents. She criticized the administration for what she called an unlawful reduction of critical federal funding.

Federal government lawyers called the case “extraordinarily unusual” and argued for dismissal, stating that some grants were already terminated and that potential future impacts were speculative. They claimed the states were presenting broad objections without seeking specific remedies to restore any grants. The Office of Management and Budget did not comment on the ruling.