Fact Check: Legal experts doubt the viability of states withholding federal funds.

Fact Check: Legal experts doubt the viability of states withholding federal funds.

Published June 29, 2025
±
VERDICT
Partially True

# Fact Check: Legal Experts Doubt the Viability of States Withholding Federal Funds ## What We Know The claim that "legal experts doubt the viability...

Fact Check: Legal Experts Doubt the Viability of States Withholding Federal Funds

What We Know

The claim that "legal experts doubt the viability of states withholding federal funds" stems from discussions surrounding California's potential response to federal funding cuts proposed by the Trump administration. Governor Gavin Newsom suggested that California might consider withholding taxes it pays to the federal government if federal funding to the state were cut. However, experts have pointed out that the logistics of such a move are unclear. According to CalMatters, tax experts described the state's threat as "vague" and noted that residents and businesses pay taxes directly to both state and federal governments, complicating the idea of withholding federal funds.

Furthermore, the concept of withholding federal funds is fraught with legal challenges. Jared Walczak, a tax expert from the Tax Foundation, stated that "courts have made it abundantly clear that you can’t be a conscientious objector to paying taxes" (source-2). This indicates that any attempt by a state to withhold federal funds could face significant legal hurdles.

Analysis

The assertion that legal experts doubt the viability of states withholding federal funds is supported by credible sources. The discussions surrounding California's potential actions highlight a lack of clarity and legal precedent for such a move. The experts consulted by CalMatters were hesitant to endorse the idea, emphasizing the complexities involved in tax payments and federal funding mechanisms (source-2).

Moreover, the legal framework surrounding federal funding and state taxation is well-established. The federal government has significant authority over its funding allocations, and states cannot unilaterally decide to withhold federal taxes without facing legal repercussions. As noted by Walczak, the legitimacy of federal programs like Medicare and Social Security complicates claims of being a "donor state," further undermining arguments for withholding funds (source-2).

While the claim is grounded in a real discussion about state-federal relations, the legal feasibility of such actions remains highly questionable. The potential for legal challenges and the established precedent against withholding federal funds suggest that the viability of this strategy is indeed doubtful.

Conclusion

The verdict on the claim that "legal experts doubt the viability of states withholding federal funds" is Partially True. While there is a basis for skepticism regarding the feasibility of states withholding federal funds, the discussions are rooted in specific contexts and legal interpretations that may vary. The complexities of tax law and federal-state relations indicate that while the idea has been floated, its practical implementation is fraught with legal challenges and uncertainties.

Sources

  1. Home Insurance Quotes from only £163 - Admiral
  2. Could California withhold federal tax dollars in response ...
  3. Home Buildings Insurance Quotes from only £131 - Admiral
  4. Blue states launch latest legal challenge to Trump funding ...
  5. See What's Covered With Our Home Insurance - Admiral
  6. Sharing the Facts About Unlawful Attempts to Freeze ...
  7. Home Contents Insurance Quotes from only £60 - Admiral
  8. 22 States Filed a New Suit Challenging the Trump ...

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

Fact Check: Are their ANY investment schemes in Canada that are legal and not scams
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Are their ANY investment schemes in Canada that are legal and not scams

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Are their ANY investment schemes in Canada that are legal and not scams

Aug 9, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Foreign Investor Quietly Drops $65M. on Fire-Charred Malibu Lots. Real estate insiders say the buyer, not a U.S. citizen, snapped up multiple burned properties through shell companies and cash deals after January's wildfires. The investor’s identity and country of origin remain hidden behind layers of legal and financial secrecy.
True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Foreign Investor Quietly Drops $65M. on Fire-Charred Malibu Lots. Real estate insiders say the buyer, not a U.S. citizen, snapped up multiple burned properties through shell companies and cash deals after January's wildfires. The investor’s identity and country of origin remain hidden behind layers of legal and financial secrecy.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Foreign Investor Quietly Drops $65M. on Fire-Charred Malibu Lots. Real estate insiders say the buyer, not a U.S. citizen, snapped up multiple burned properties through shell companies and cash deals after January's wildfires. The investor’s identity and country of origin remain hidden behind layers of legal and financial secrecy.

Aug 17, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: "Russian Collusion hoax" was treasonous, orchestrated by the Obama administration and deep-state actors to overthrow Trump, and calls for legal prosecution of Obama, Clinton, and others.
False
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: "Russian Collusion hoax" was treasonous, orchestrated by the Obama administration and deep-state actors to overthrow Trump, and calls for legal prosecution of Obama, Clinton, and others.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: "Russian Collusion hoax" was treasonous, orchestrated by the Obama administration and deep-state actors to overthrow Trump, and calls for legal prosecution of Obama, Clinton, and others.

Jul 31, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: The transcript asserts that “Alligator Alcatraz”—a migrant detention center in the Everglades—is extremely remote and has created severe barriers to legal access for detained migrants, in violation of due process.
Unverified

Fact Check: The transcript asserts that “Alligator Alcatraz”—a migrant detention center in the Everglades—is extremely remote and has created severe barriers to legal access for detained migrants, in violation of due process.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: The transcript asserts that “Alligator Alcatraz”—a migrant detention center in the Everglades—is extremely remote and has created severe barriers to legal access for detained migrants, in violation of due process.

Jul 30, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: MULTIPLE SOURCES CONFIRM THAT ICE IS NOW GOING FROM PARK TO PARK IN LOS ANGELES, ARRESTING CAREGIVERS... SOME WHO ARE LEGAL RESIDENTS, AND SEPARATING THEM FROM THE AMERICAN CHILDREN THEY'RE CARING FOR.
KIDS ARE BEING THROWN INTO THE BACK OF VAN UNTIL THEIR PARENTS ARE LOCATED.
False

Fact Check: MULTIPLE SOURCES CONFIRM THAT ICE IS NOW GOING FROM PARK TO PARK IN LOS ANGELES, ARRESTING CAREGIVERS... SOME WHO ARE LEGAL RESIDENTS, AND SEPARATING THEM FROM THE AMERICAN CHILDREN THEY'RE CARING FOR. KIDS ARE BEING THROWN INTO THE BACK OF VAN UNTIL THEIR PARENTS ARE LOCATED.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: MULTIPLE SOURCES CONFIRM THAT ICE IS NOW GOING FROM PARK TO PARK IN LOS ANGELES, ARRESTING CAREGIVERS... SOME WHO ARE LEGAL RESIDENTS, AND SEPARATING THEM FROM THE AMERICAN CHILDREN THEY'RE CARING FOR. KIDS ARE BEING THROWN INTO THE BACK OF VAN UNTIL THEIR PARENTS ARE LOCATED.

Jul 29, 2025
Read more →