The cuts to several states come amid an escalating fraud fallout fueled by a dubious YouTube investigation of Minnesota day cares.
The Trump administration on Monday said it had slashed billions in social services funds to a handful of blue states as part of its escalating response to new and unproven fraud allegations in Minnesota.
The Department of Health and Human Services will freeze $10 billion worth of federal grants to California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, and New York, an HHS official told HuffPost, confirming news first reported by The New York Post.
It’s not clear whether the freeze was inspired by specific fraud allegations or solely for political reasons. Officials did not immediately provide a public explanation.
Yes and no. Laws can be designed for different states or even interpreted differently based on state law. A good example is conditional funding based on certain criteria, drinking age for example. What is unusual, and maybe unconstitutional, is if the laws are designed to target certain groups or political affiliations. So if the purpose or effect violates constitutional protections, such as equal protection, due process, the First Amendment, or bans on bills of attainder (laws targeting specific people). But we all know with this administration it is a free-for-all since so much of this shit is blatantly either illegal or unconstitutional and nothing is being done to stop them.
You’re talking about State laws being different.
They’re asking about the Federal government applying federal laws differently to select States.
Which is very not normal.
No I really wasn’t.
For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_jurisdictions_subject_to_the_special_provisions_of_the_Voting_Rights_Act_of_1965
Now it’s not common but it’s not unprecedented.
The reasons he’s doing it this time are not normal.