A federal judge has blocked the U.S. Department of Education from revoking extensions on over $1 billion in school COVID relief funds, siding with states that claimed the move was unlawful and harmful.
Key Facts:
- On May 6, U.S. District Judge Edgardo Ramos issued a preliminary injunction against the Department of Education’s decision to rescind funding extensions.
- The extensions were granted in January by the prior administration and allowed access to funds through March 2026.
- Education Secretary Linda McMahon claimed in March the extensions were “not justified” since the pandemic was over and said states could reapply.
- New York, Oregon, Washington, and 13 other states sued, warning they’d lose over $1 billion without an injunction.
- The judge ordered the department not to alter or cancel extensions without giving states at least 14 days’ notice.
The Rest of The Story:
The dispute centers on funds Congress approved to help schools manage the impact of COVID-19.
More than $276 billion in education stabilization money was allocated to states, with deadlines to designate funds by September 30, 2024, and to spend them by January 28, 2025.
Some states requested and received extensions into 2026.
In March, Education Secretary Linda McMahon informed states that these extensions were being revoked after a review determined they were unjustified due to the pandemic being declared over.
The plaintiffs—New York, Oregon, Washington, 13 other states, and Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro—argued that they would lose over $1 billion without immediate court intervention.
They claimed the department’s reversal was arbitrary, ignored the law, and falsely assumed the funds were only meant for pandemic-specific use.
Federal lawyers pushed back, saying the department had acted within its discretion and that states could simply reapply.
They also claimed states wouldn’t face irreparable harm, but the judge disagreed and issued the injunction.
Commentary:
This ruling is another case of a federal judge stepping in to halt the decisions of elected officials who are trying to bring order and accountability back to the government.
The Department of Education is well within its rights to reevaluate policies set during a national emergency.
But now, thanks to one judge, that authority has been handcuffed—at least temporarily.
These judges are unelected, serve for life, and are increasingly taking it upon themselves to dictate executive policy.
That’s not how our system is supposed to work.
The longer this continues, the more likely it is that an administration will have no choice but to push back and ignore these rulings entirely.
That’s a dangerous place to be, but if activist judges keep treating executive actions like suggestions instead of law, they may leave the president no other option.
The Bottom Line:
The court’s injunction halts the Department of Education’s move to cancel pandemic-era school funding extensions, preserving access to over \$1 billion in relief for now.
Sixteen states argued the reversal was unlawful, and a federal judge agreed to pause the action.
This legal battle reflects growing tensions between unelected judges and the executive branch.
If this trend keeps up, it may lead to a constitutional showdown.
Read Next
– Democrats Open The Door To Another Run For President By Kamala Harris
– Top California Lawman Ditches Democrats, Joins GOP: “Time to Make California Purple Again”