Case docket
State of New York v. Trump — U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, Nos. 25-1236 and 25-1413
State of New York v. Trump — 5 court filings in the archive from U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, filed between July 25, 2025 and March 16, 2026.
Case facts
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit |
|---|---|
| Filings | 5 public filings |
| Filed | 2025-07-25 – 2026-03-16 |
| Original PDFs | 5 of 5 |
Case summary
Twenty-two states and the District of Columbia sued President Donald Trump, the Office of Management and Budget, its Acting Director, eleven other agencies and various agency heads in the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island over a directive pausing federal financial assistance. The freeze followed OMB Memorandum M-25-13 of January 27, 2025, entitled "Temporary Pause of Agency Grant, Loan, and Other Financial Assistance Programs," which directed federal agencies to review all federal financial assistance programs consistent with the President's policies, including seven executive orders. On March 16, 2026 the court affirmed the March 6, 2025 preliminary injunction in part, vacated it in part, affirmed the April 4, 2025 and April 14, 2025 orders, and remanded for further proceedings. The vacated portion is the one requiring disbursements on awarded grants and executed contracts, which the court held the Tucker Act likely places outside the district court's jurisdiction.
Case at a glance
| Parties | Plaintiffs, Appellees: the States of New York, California, Illinois, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, North Carolina, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the District of Columbia, and the Office of the Governor of Kentucky ex rel. Andrew Beshear. Defendants, Appellants: Donald J. Trump, in his official capacity as President; the U.S. Office of Management and Budget and Russell T. Vought, its Director; and the federal departments and agencies named in the caption with their heads, including the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the U.S. Small Business Administration |
|---|---|
| Court and docket | U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, Nos. 25-1236 and 25-1413, on appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island, No. 1:25-cv-00039-JJM (Hon. John J. McConnell, Jr.); before Barron, Chief Judge, Montecalvo and Rikelman, Circuit Judges |
| Program | Not named in the filings on this page. The subject is federal financial assistance generally: OMB Memorandum M-25-13 directed federal agencies to identify and review all federal financial assistance programs consistent with the President's policies and requirements, including those set forth in seven executive orders |
| Claims | Administrative Procedure Act claims that the OMB Directive and the agency-wide categorical funding freezes the agency defendants allegedly put in place were arbitrary and capricious and contrary to law, 5 U.S.C. Section 706(2)(A)-(C), together with constitutional grounds; the district court also relied on the Impoundment Control Act and appropriation laws, which the court of appeals did not reach |
| Disposition or status | Affirmed in part, vacated in part and remanded. The March 6, 2025 preliminary injunction was affirmed in part and vacated in part, the April 4, 2025 order enforcing it against FEMA and the April 14, 2025 order denying reconsideration were affirmed, and the matter was remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion |
| Status checked | 2026-09-23 · against DOJ press releases through 2026-09-22; court docket not yet read |
What did the court of appeals decide?
That the states are likely to succeed on their APA claims because the agency defendants instituted agency-wide categorical freezes without reasoned assessments of the impacts of those actions or of the reliance interests the district court found had been ignored, and that the government had not shown the district court abused its discretion on the remaining Winter factors or in the orders enforcing the injunction against FEMA. Having affirmed on arbitrary-and-capricious grounds, the court did not reach the district court's other grounds, that the freeze was contrary to the Impoundment Control Act and appropriation laws.
What part of the injunction was vacated?
The fourth paragraph's requirement that the agency defendants release disbursements to the states on awarded grants and executed contracts, because under the Supreme Court's pronouncements on the interaction between the APA and the Tucker Act the district court likely cannot order that payment. To the extent the same paragraph's phrase "other executed financial obligations" refers to obligations pursuant to instruments akin to the grants at issue in National Institutes of Health v. American Public Health Association, that portion must be vacated as well; questions about its scope were left to the district court in the first instance.
What else is published under this route?
Three amicus briefs in the same appeals, Nos. 25-1236 and 25-1413, each in support of the plaintiffs-appellees and affirmance: a brief for 157 members of Congress, a brief for Dr. Arati Prabhakar, and a brief of the U.S. Conference of Mayors. They carry the archive date July 25, 2025 and are not listed in the case page's filings index.
Summary written from the documents on this page; every sentence is sourced.
Filings
5 public filings from this case, in filing-date order.
- Brief of 157 Members of Congress as Amici Curiae — New York v. Trump (1st Cir.)Memorandum or brief · PDF
- Amicus Brief of Dr. Arati Prabhakar — New York v. Trump (1st Cir.)PDF
- U.S. Conference of Mayors Amicus Brief — New York v. Trump (1st Cir.)PDF
- First Circuit Judgment — New York v. Trump (Federal Funding Freeze) (1st Cir.)
- First Circuit Opinion — New York v. Trump (Federal Funding Freeze) (1st Cir.)PDF
Court, dates and docket numbers are as recorded on the filings.