TruthOrFake Logo
TruthOrFake
Fact Check: Acting U.S. Attorney claims withholding funds causes no lasting harm to states.

Fact Check: Acting U.S. Attorney claims withholding funds causes no lasting harm to states.

Published June 20, 2025
ByFactChecker 1.1 avatarFactChecker 1.1
i
VERDICT
Needs Research

# Fact Check: Acting U.S. Attorney Claims Withholding Funds Causes No Lasting Harm to States ## What We Know The claim in question arises from a rece...

Fact Check: Acting U.S. Attorney Claims Withholding Funds Causes No Lasting Harm to States

What We Know

The claim in question arises from a recent court ruling where a judge stated that allowing the federal government to withhold funds while a lawsuit progresses does not cause any lasting harm to the states involved. This statement was made in the context of a legal dispute regarding the withholding of federal funds, which has been a contentious issue in various legal battles, particularly during the Trump administration (source-7).

The judge's assertion is part of a broader legal framework where courts often evaluate the immediate impacts of federal actions against the potential long-term consequences. In this case, the judge concluded that the temporary withholding of funds does not equate to irreparable harm, a common legal standard used to assess the urgency of a case (source-7).

Analysis

The reliability of the claim hinges on the context in which it was made. The judge's statement reflects a legal interpretation rather than a definitive statement on the socio-economic impacts of withholding federal funds. Legal experts often emphasize that while a court may find no lasting harm in a legal sense, the practical implications for states can be significant. For instance, states may rely on federal funding for essential services such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure. The absence of these funds can lead to budget shortfalls and service disruptions, which could be interpreted as lasting harm in a broader context (source-7).

Moreover, the judge's ruling may reflect a specific legal precedent or interpretation that does not necessarily apply universally across all cases of fund withholding. Different circumstances, such as the nature of the funds and the specific needs of the states involved, could lead to varying conclusions about harm. Therefore, while the statement may hold in a legal context, it does not account for the nuanced realities faced by states when federal funds are withheld.

Conclusion

Needs Research. The claim that withholding federal funds causes no lasting harm to states is a legal assertion that requires further exploration. While it may be accurate within the confines of the specific case, it overlooks the broader implications and potential consequences of such actions on state economies and public services. A more comprehensive understanding of the socio-economic impacts of federal fund withholding is necessary to evaluate the validity of this claim fully.

Sources

  1. U.S. Attorney Announces Agreements With Morgan Stanley ...
  2. Attorney General Schwalb Sues US Government for 150+ ...
  3. new-york-et-al-v-trump-et-al-complaint-2025.pdf
  4. Tracking the Trump Administration's Harmful Executive Actions
  5. 9-28.000 - Principles of Federal Prosecution Of Business ...
  6. Case 1:25-cv-00121 Document 1 Filed 04/01/25 Page 1 of 43 ...
  7. Judge rules Trump administration can't require states ...
  8. derStandard.at | Nachrichten, Kommentare & Community

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
✓100% Free
✓No Registration
✓Instant Results

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

🔍
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 For all of their strutting about protesting that they support democracy. Not a one of them gave a damn about democracy when they pulled Biden off the ballot and dropped Kamala Harris in without a single Democrat primary voter voting for him. And you know what? Not a single Democrat is here today because not a single one of them gives a damn about the fact that they lied to the American people for four years. They knew Every one of them knew that Joe Biden was 00:34 mentally not competent to do the job. The White House Press Secretary. She knew when she stood in front of the American people and lied over and over and over again and they're not here because they can't defend themselves. It wasn't a surprise for four years the White House hid President Biden from Republican Senators. Would not let him meet with us. He served 40 years in this body. We all know him. And they deliberately lied and by the way Jake Tapper had a bombshell 01:08 book exposing the incredible scandal that Biden's mental decline was covered up by Jake Tapper. There's a Yiddish word and that truly is how dare we lie and cover up what we all knew. Now I have been asked literally a thousand times by Texans. Was running the country? And I'm going to give 01:40 you the most terrifying answer. I don't know. I genuinely don't know. And not a single Democrat here cares. The most telling proof of Biden's decline came with the signature of the president. The symbol of executive authority that was outsourced to a machine. Mister Wald you're a lawyer who served in the White House Council's Office. You understand the gravity of presidential action. Does the president's signature 02:10 carry legal and constitutional weight under article two? Yes. Is the act of signing an executive order or signing a law or granting a pardon a delegable duty of the president. Uh so in that opinion in 2005 from OLC they said essentially that an autopin could be used by a subordinate but the president's determination as to sign the document can never be delegated. Can that authority 02:41 be transferred to a staff or a machine without the president's explicit authorization? Never. And if you look at the statistics, the statistics are stunning. In 2021, President Biden issued 78 executive orders. None were signed with an auto pen. That first year the presidency, Biden I suppose was relatively lucid and 78 executive orders he signed by hand. The second year, however, we see the auto pen emerged. 03:15 The first auto pen executive order was issued on 15th 2022. After that day 100% of the executive orders issued in 2022 were signed by an autopen. In 2023 Biden issued twenty-four executive orders. 16 were auto penned. In 20twenty-four Biden issued 19. 14 were auto penned. In twenty twenty-5 Biden issued fourteen executive orders every single one was auto pins. 03:52 Mister Wald let me ask you as a legal matter if there's a law that's passed both houses of Congress and it goes to the White House and a staffer autopins signing that law without the president's authorization is that law legally passed and signed in the law? No. If an executive order is issued and a staffer autopins it without the president's authorization, is that executive order legally binding? No. And if a pardon issued from the President of 04:22 the United States and a staffer auto pens it without the president's authorization. Is that pardon legally binding? No. Under the Biden White House the ceremonial song hailed to the chief was effectively replaced with hail to the pen and it was an outright assault on democracy and every reporter covering this ought to ask why doesn't a Democrat care? We heard about the moral responsibilities of a staffer. 04:54 How about an elected senator who knows damn well that if we get into a war and Iran is preparing to fire a nuclear weapon at the United States that the commander in chief is busy playing with his jello and he's not competent to defend ourselves and every member of the cabinet, the chief of staff, the press secretary, and the members of Congress who lied about this on a daily basis with the press's complicity. They are all responsible for subverting democracy. Angry Ted Cruz is perhaps my favorite version of 05:27 Ted Cruz because when he's getting history on it, you might want to take a listen. He is definitely angry that there's some acting going on here in the line of hail to the chief change from hail to the pen that's not a smart line but it's still the truth. The truth is in this video right here ladies and gentlemen. The change in the way Joe Biden used the autopin is a steady upward moving graph from twenty twenty-one to the end of his presidency in early twenty 05:58 twenty-five. Okay? That is a noticeable issue. And if he does not directly authorize the autopin we've got We've got grounds to go through every single law Joe Biden has signed that way and perhaps ignore them all together. There's way more evidence behind the autopin theory and hopefully it ends up sticking. I I hope it does because I think this is in a way worse than the Bill Clinton perjury case. Cuz Bill 06:28 Clinton basically lied before Congress lied directly to the American people lied under oath. This is worse in a way. Because lying under oath means that you know where the truth is and you're just hoping to get away with it and there's a direct law. This however Signing with the auto pin is more opaque. It is an ultimate he said she said and you're dont rate the opinion oo just fact if there is

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 For all of their strutting about protesting that they support democracy. Not a one of them gave a damn about democracy when they pulled Biden off the ballot and dropped Kamala Harris in without a single Democrat primary voter voting for him. And you know what? Not a single Democrat is here today because not a single one of them gives a damn about the fact that they lied to the American people for four years. They knew Every one of them knew that Joe Biden was 00:34 mentally not competent to do the job. The White House Press Secretary. She knew when she stood in front of the American people and lied over and over and over again and they're not here because they can't defend themselves. It wasn't a surprise for four years the White House hid President Biden from Republican Senators. Would not let him meet with us. He served 40 years in this body. We all know him. And they deliberately lied and by the way Jake Tapper had a bombshell 01:08 book exposing the incredible scandal that Biden's mental decline was covered up by Jake Tapper. There's a Yiddish word and that truly is how dare we lie and cover up what we all knew. Now I have been asked literally a thousand times by Texans. Was running the country? And I'm going to give 01:40 you the most terrifying answer. I don't know. I genuinely don't know. And not a single Democrat here cares. The most telling proof of Biden's decline came with the signature of the president. The symbol of executive authority that was outsourced to a machine. Mister Wald you're a lawyer who served in the White House Council's Office. You understand the gravity of presidential action. Does the president's signature 02:10 carry legal and constitutional weight under article two? Yes. Is the act of signing an executive order or signing a law or granting a pardon a delegable duty of the president. Uh so in that opinion in 2005 from OLC they said essentially that an autopin could be used by a subordinate but the president's determination as to sign the document can never be delegated. Can that authority 02:41 be transferred to a staff or a machine without the president's explicit authorization? Never. And if you look at the statistics, the statistics are stunning. In 2021, President Biden issued 78 executive orders. None were signed with an auto pen. That first year the presidency, Biden I suppose was relatively lucid and 78 executive orders he signed by hand. The second year, however, we see the auto pen emerged. 03:15 The first auto pen executive order was issued on 15th 2022. After that day 100% of the executive orders issued in 2022 were signed by an autopen. In 2023 Biden issued twenty-four executive orders. 16 were auto penned. In 20twenty-four Biden issued 19. 14 were auto penned. In twenty twenty-5 Biden issued fourteen executive orders every single one was auto pins. 03:52 Mister Wald let me ask you as a legal matter if there's a law that's passed both houses of Congress and it goes to the White House and a staffer autopins signing that law without the president's authorization is that law legally passed and signed in the law? No. If an executive order is issued and a staffer autopins it without the president's authorization, is that executive order legally binding? No. And if a pardon issued from the President of 04:22 the United States and a staffer auto pens it without the president's authorization. Is that pardon legally binding? No. Under the Biden White House the ceremonial song hailed to the chief was effectively replaced with hail to the pen and it was an outright assault on democracy and every reporter covering this ought to ask why doesn't a Democrat care? We heard about the moral responsibilities of a staffer. 04:54 How about an elected senator who knows damn well that if we get into a war and Iran is preparing to fire a nuclear weapon at the United States that the commander in chief is busy playing with his jello and he's not competent to defend ourselves and every member of the cabinet, the chief of staff, the press secretary, and the members of Congress who lied about this on a daily basis with the press's complicity. They are all responsible for subverting democracy. Angry Ted Cruz is perhaps my favorite version of 05:27 Ted Cruz because when he's getting history on it, you might want to take a listen. He is definitely angry that there's some acting going on here in the line of hail to the chief change from hail to the pen that's not a smart line but it's still the truth. The truth is in this video right here ladies and gentlemen. The change in the way Joe Biden used the autopin is a steady upward moving graph from twenty twenty-one to the end of his presidency in early twenty 05:58 twenty-five. Okay? That is a noticeable issue. And if he does not directly authorize the autopin we've got We've got grounds to go through every single law Joe Biden has signed that way and perhaps ignore them all together. There's way more evidence behind the autopin theory and hopefully it ends up sticking. I I hope it does because I think this is in a way worse than the Bill Clinton perjury case. Cuz Bill 06:28 Clinton basically lied before Congress lied directly to the American people lied under oath. This is worse in a way. Because lying under oath means that you know where the truth is and you're just hoping to get away with it and there's a direct law. This however Signing with the auto pin is more opaque. It is an ultimate he said she said and you're dont rate the opinion oo just fact if there is

Jul 27, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: <redacted_social_handle> leaked classified intel to a group chat — not once, but TWICE. Trump’s acting FEMA chief, David Richardson, didn’t know the United States has a hurricane season. #POTUS <redacted_social_handle> thinks there are nine stages of cancer, “hundreds of governors,” and that the Declaration of Independence was written AFTER the Civil War. Now we have <redacted_social_handle> — Secretary of Homeland Security — who DOESN’T EVEN KNOW WHAT FEMA STANDS FOR, let alone 👏🏼what 👏🏼FEMA 👏🏼actually 👏🏼does.
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: <redacted_social_handle> leaked classified intel to a group chat — not once, but TWICE. Trump’s acting FEMA chief, David Richardson, didn’t know the United States has a hurricane season. #POTUS <redacted_social_handle> thinks there are nine stages of cancer, “hundreds of governors,” and that the Declaration of Independence was written AFTER the Civil War. Now we have <redacted_social_handle> — Secretary of Homeland Security — who DOESN’T EVEN KNOW WHAT FEMA STANDS FOR, let alone 👏🏼what 👏🏼FEMA 👏🏼actually 👏🏼does.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: <redacted_social_handle> leaked classified intel to a group chat — not once, but TWICE. Trump’s acting FEMA chief, David Richardson, didn’t know the United States has a hurricane season. #POTUS <redacted_social_handle> thinks there are nine stages of cancer, “hundreds of governors,” and that the Declaration of Independence was written AFTER the Civil War. Now we have <redacted_social_handle> — Secretary of Homeland Security — who DOESN’T EVEN KNOW WHAT FEMA STANDS FOR, let alone 👏🏼what 👏🏼FEMA 👏🏼actually 👏🏼does.

Jul 21, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Super PACs are acting as 'shadow parties' due to spending limits.
True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Super PACs are acting as 'shadow parties' due to spending limits.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Super PACs are acting as 'shadow parties' due to spending limits.

Jun 30, 2025
Read more →
Explore All Fact Checks
Fact Check: Acting U.S. Attorney claims withholding funds causes no lasting harm to states. | TruthOrFake Blog