D.C. and Maryland Attorneys General
Join to Halt Education Dept. Shutdown
Attorneys general from the District of Columbia and Maryland are joining a 21-state legal effort to stop President Donald Trump from shutting down the U.S. Department of Education.
Trump signed an executive order last week that seeks to shut down the Education Department but he also raised questions on whether he can succeed in closing the department that has overseen student loans, grants to schools and civil rights in education since 1979.
Trump said he wants to return supervision of schools to the states.
Democratic state attorneys general filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts that asks for an injunction to block Trump’s order.
It says halting the Education Department’s key functions is “equivalent to incapacitating key, statutorily-mandated functions of the Department, causing immense damage” to states and educational systems.
Other legal action is being pledged by congressional Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries.
“We will stop this malignant Republican scheme in the House of Representatives and in the courts,” Jeffries said.
The Education Department was created by Congress, which means constitutional authority to shut it down lies only with Congress, according to federal court interpretations of the law.
Sixty votes would be needed in the Senate. Republicans who generally agree with Trump hold only 53 seats.
The United States spends more money per student than any other country but “we rank near the bottom of the list” in terms of student achievement, Trump said at the White House signing ceremony attended by students, teachers and state governors.
He said the Education Department “is doing us no good.”
By returning authority over education to the states, “Probably the cost will be half and the education will be many, many times better,” Trump said.
The Education Department's annual budget for fiscal 2024 was $268 billion, or about 4 percent of total federal spending.
Before Trump took office, the Education Department had 4,133 employees, according to the Office of Personnel Management.
Layoffs and buyouts at the department started shortly after Trump was sworn in on Jan. 20. This month, the Trump administration fired another 1,315 Education Department employees.
The Education Department’s headquarters near the Capitol is now operating with about half the staff it had before the last presidential election. The biggest cuts were on the Office for Civil Rights, Office of Federal Student Aid and Institute of Education Sciences.
For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: tramstack@gmail.com or phone: 202-479-7240.
Trump Says Biden’s Pardons
Void by His Use of Autopen
Skepticism continues in the legal community this week over President Donald Trump’s announcement on social media that the pardons granted by his predecessor are invalid because they were signed with an autopen.
He was referring to a wave of preemptive pardons former President Joe Biden granted in the final hours of his presidency.
They included members of his own family and the House committee that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection at the Capitol. The committee’s report accused Trump of inciting a riot as part of an attempt to block Biden’s 2020 presidential victory.
“The ‘Pardons’ that Sleepy Joe Biden gave to the Unselect committee of Political Thugs, and many others, are hereby declared VOID, VACANT, AND OF NO FURTHER FORCE OR EFFECT, because of the fact that they were done by Autopen,” Trump wrote on his social media site Truth Social. “In other words, Joe Biden did not sign them but, more importantly, he did not know anything about them!”
Autopens are electric devices with motorized arms used for quick and automatic signing of signatures. They are used commonly by government and corporate officials who are called upon to sign documents frequently.
They have been used by U.S. presidents to sign legislation since 2011, when Barack Obama used one to sign an extension of the Patriot Act.
Although the U.S. Constitution gives presidents the power to pardon accused wrongdoers, it does not convey authority to revoke pardons from other presidents. In addition, no case law from court judgments supports a president’s authority to eliminate a pardon, according to legal experts.
When asked by the news media whether all legislation Biden signed would be rendered void by his use of autopens, Trump reportedly said, “It’s not my decision. That would be up to a court. But I would say that they’re null and void, because I’m sure that Biden didn’t have any idea that it was taking place.”
Trump’s assertion that use of an autopen renders Biden’s pardons void appears to conflict with a 2005 Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel guidance on a president’s signing authority.
The Justice Department said a president "need not personally perform the physical act of affixing his signature to a bill he approves and decides to sign in order for the bill to become law."
"Rather, the President may sign a bill within the meaning of Article I, Section 7 by directing a subordinate to affix the President’s signature to such a bill, for example by autopen," the explanation said.
Trump said shortly after his reelection that he believed the government officials who accused him and his top advisors of criminal behavior should be prosecuted and jailed.
He said in his Truth Social post last week that members of the House Jan. 6 committee would be “subject to investigation at the highest level.”
Trump’s threat to void pardons and to investigate members of the House Jan. 6 committee brought angry responses from lawmakers who could be in the president’s crosshairs.
Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said in a post on X that he refused to be intimidated.
“The members of the Jan 6 Committee are all proud of our work,” Schiff wrote. “Your threats will not intimidate us. Or silence us.”
For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: tramstack@gmail.com or phone: 202-479-7240.
Judge Says Musk Team’s Foreign Aid
Terminations Lack Constitutional Authority
A federal judge in Greenbelt, Md., last week ordered the Trump administration to halt the dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development in the first ruling to take aim directly at Elon Musk.
The judge said Musk appears to lack constitutional authority because he is unelected and not confirmed by the Senate.
In addition, the agency was created by Congress so only Congress has the constitutional authority to shut it down, the judge ruled.
If the court ruling is upheld on appeal, it could undercut nearly all government reform efforts ordered by Musk and the Department of Governmental Efficiency he leads.
The ruling from U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang said the Department of Governmental Affairs "likely violated the United States Constitution in multiple ways, and that these actions harmed not only plaintiffs, but also the public interest."
Hours later, President Donald Trump told Fox News that his administration planned to appeal.
"I guarantee you we will be appealing it. We have rogue judges that are destroying our country," Trump said.
The lawsuit resulted from an executive order Trump issued Jan. 20 freezing all foreign aid until a review determined whether it was aligned with his administration’s policies.
On February 3, Musk wrote on X that he "spent the weekend feeding USAID into the wood chipper." The agency had been operating with a budget of more than $40 billion a year.
Three days later, the Trump administration announced plans to reduce the number of Agency for International Development employees from about 10,000 to 290. Its foreign relief efforts were being turned over to the State Department, which plans to eliminate 80 percent of its programs.
On Feb. 13, the lawsuit by 26 Agency for International Development employees represented by the State Democracy Defenders Fund was filed in U.S. District Court in Greenbelt, Md., seeking a preliminary injunction. It alleges violations of the Appointments Clause and separation of powers in the U.S. Constitution.
Musk argued unsuccessfully that he was merely an adviser to the president and his staff, who made the ultimate decisions on personnel and policy.
Chuang said Musk’s actions indicated he effectively exercised direct control over the Agency for International Development.
The judge’s ruling orders the Department of Governmental Affairs to return access to Agency for International Development computer systems to its employees and contractors, including thousands who were placed on leave. The judge barred Musk and his team from disclosing employees’ private information.
Chuang did not try to reverse the firings of Agency for International Development staff or contracts. He said they might be unconstitutional but they were approved by unnamed government officials who appeared to act within their authority.
Musk’s Republican supporters say the Department of Governmental Efficiency has so far saved taxpayers $150 billion with more cuts coming. They say they have no better alternative while they face a $36 trillion federal deficit that threatens to bankrupt the U.S. government.
For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: tramstack@gmail.com or phone: 202-479-7240.
Virginia Judge Says Human Embryos
Are Not Property in Divorce Partitioning
A Fairfax County judge’s ruling that frozen human embryos are not “goods or chattel” is putting a new spin on how Virginia defines property that can be divided through divorce proceedings.
Fairfax Circuit Court Judge Dontaè L. Bugg invoked a 19th century slave law in saying that humans – or their embryos – could not be considered property.
State law allows partitioning of marital property through divorce but until now was silent on embryos.
The case involved a dispute between former spouses Honeyhline Heidemann and Jason Heidemann over ownership of two embryos they froze during a 2015 cycle of in vitro fertilization.
They divorced three years later while the embryos still were in storage.
Honeyhline Heidemann testified at a bench trial that the embryos were her only chance to have another biological child after cancer treatment left her infertile. She asked the court to give her ownership of the embryos so they could be implanted in her.
Jason Heidemann disputed his ex-wife’s right of ownership and to be fertilized with the embryos without his consent. He said he did not want to become a biological father to another child after the divorce.
Bugg wrote in his opinion that there was no law authorizing the purchase or sale of fertilized eggs, similar to property. As a result, they could not be part of the marital property for which a divorce court determines ownership.
“In fact, the embryos are as unique as any two people that may be selected from the population, including siblings with the same biological parents,” Bugg wrote.
He also wrote that “there appears to be a gap in Virginia law for the disposition of human embryos…”
Bugg dismissed the case but did not resolve a national debate on whether embryos are human. Seven states define them as “persons” or “human beings” according to the nonprofit organization Pregnancy Justice.
For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: tramstack@gmail.com or phone: 202-479-7240.
D.C. Residents Rank Highest
As Victims of Fraudsters
The District Columbia had more fraud victims per capita last year than any other state or region in the United States, according to a new Federal Trade Commission report.
Maryland ranked 11th and Virginia 26th when Washington is included in the rankings, the report says.
Nationwide, consumers reported losing more than $12.5 billion to fraud in 2024, which represents a 25 percent increase over the previous year.
Investment scams were the most common kind of fraud. They accounted for $5.7 billion in losses. Imposter scams ranked second with $2.95 billion reported lost.
Fraud induced through bank transfers or cryptocurrency payments created more losses than all other payment methods combined.
“The data we’re releasing today shows that scammers’ tactics are constantly evolving,” said Christopher Mufarrige, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, in a press release.
In one example, fraudsters posing as charitable organizations advertised websites in January where donors could make online bank transfers to help victims of the California wildfires that ravaged the Los Angeles area.
The scams prompted Washington, D.C., Attorney General Brian L. Schwalb to issue a consumer alert in which he said, “Many Washingtonians understandably want to help those harmed by the devastating wildfires in Southern California. Unfortunately, there are bad actors who prey upon that generous spirit, taking advantage of a natural disaster in order to line their pockets.”
The FTC reported similar pitfalls for consumers that showed they commonly fell victim to fraud through online shopping, followed by payments to take advantage of business and job opportunities.
For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: tramstack@gmail.com or phone: 202-479-7240.