BALTIMORE — On the same day Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown joined 21 other Democratic led states in suing the Trump Administration over frozen education funds, the U.S. Supreme Court green lighted the President's plans to overhaul staffing at the Department of Education.
This is the latest example of the justices checking the authority of lower district level court judges who've taken it upon themselves to issue countless injunctions that have hampered Trump from implementing his agenda.
The case was brought before a Massachusetts judge appointed by former President Joe Biden, in a district where only one Republican appointee actively sits.
As could be predicted, judge Myong Joun granted Brown and the states a preliminary injunction barring the White House from going forward with their plans to cut loose more than 1,300 education department employees, with the ultimate goal of returning more power to the states.
The First Circuit Court of Appeals, which has no Republican appointed judges on the bench, upheld Joun's ruling, until the nation's high court stepped in overturning the decision.
Joun also attempted to force the feds into continued funding of DEI related training grants for teachers, as did Maryland judge Julie Rubin.
The justices again overruled Joun, while the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals paused Rubin's ruling.
While the Supreme Court, cleared the way without explanation, the move could all be jurisdictional, if other recent rulings are any indication.
According to existing law and precedent set by the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, the correct venue for federal employees to appeal their dismissal is the Merit Systems Protection Board, not a Federal District Court.
Such was the case in a separate Supreme Court decision last week, halting California judge Susan Illston's ruling prohibiting Trump's cabinet from carrying out layoffs at 17 federal agencies.
Fellow judges, William Alsup in California, and James Bredar in Maryland, were overturned on appeal as well for similar stances they took, questioning Trump's constitutional authority to reshape agencies within his own executive branch.
Several appeals remain before the Supreme Court.
Despite the justices all but eliminating nationwide injunctions last month, Brown and his coalition of blue states have continued suing Trump at nearly every turn, usually alleging violations of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
Unlike early successes at hand picked lower courts in California, New York, and New England, Brown has not fared so well in front of the Supreme Court.
As for Brown's newest lawsuit filed yesterday, it was done so in Rhode Island, where judges have frequently sided with the states.
When it comes to federal funding, the government concedes Congress's power to allocate, while defending presidential power to choose how the money's spent, which amount to administrative decisions not subject to judicial review under the APA.
Much like litigation about the federal workforce, if this case ever makes it to the Supreme Court, Brown could again face jurisdictional issues, considering funding disputes are normally heard by the Court of Federal Claims.