Donald Trump holds an Executive Order in the President's Room
(Pool/Getty)

‘Lying to you’: Trump’s administration is called out by one brave state leader

Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker emerged as a forceful voice among suddenly wakened Democrats against the Trump administration’s sweeping federal funding freeze, directly accusing the White House of duping the American public about its impact on crucial services—a freeze that appears to be part of Trump’s bloodthirsty campaign targeting diversity initiatives and programs serving minority and low-income communities.

Recommended Videos

“Donald Trump’s administration is lying to you…what the President is trying to do is illegal,” Pritzker declared in a Tuesday press conference. “I know these are challenging times, and the Trump administration is trying to confuse the American people.”

The confrontation came as chaos erupted across various government agencies and nonprofits following a vaguely worded, two-page memo—which was rescinded Wednesday—from the Office of Management and Budget ordering a halt to “all activities related to obligation or disbursement of all Federal financial assistance.” The memo specifically targeted programs related to “DEI, woke gender ideology, and the green new deal.”

The freeze’s ‘let’s see what sticks’ scope triggered legal challenges from over 20 states, with U.S. District Judge Loren L. AliKhan temporarily blocking the order until February 3rd. The ruling came in response to arguments that the directive violated both the First Amendment and Administrative Procedure Act. Legal experts suggest this is part of a calculated strategy by Trump and conservative think tanks to test the boundaries of executive power while bypassing congressional support and simultaneously dismantling diversity and equity initiatives. “Some of this stuff has only been talked about at cocktail parties at the Heritage Foundation in jest,” one Republican operative told NBC News. “And they’re actually doing it all.”

Organizations like Meals on Wheels reported uncertainty about whether they would be reimbursed for services. Head Start programs serving low-income children faced potential closures. State Medicaid systems experienced widespread outages, though the White House later claimed these were unrelated to the executive order. If the freeze is upheld, many city governments will be in harm’s way. For example, Chicago received $4 billion in grants last year, with a significant portion coming from federal funding. These dollars support critical projects, including public transportation expansion, disaster relief, and low-income housing assistance—programs that often serve minority and underserved communities.

“What we are hearing this morning is, honestly, a pretty good amount of panic by grantees,” said Ann Oliva, CEO of the National Alliance to End Homelessness to NBC News. “These programs exist in red states and blue states alike, and there are vulnerable people that are going to be impacted in many, many communities and in every state across the country.”

Trump’s break-neck approach faces significant time (and public perception) hurdles. With multiple lawsuits filed by state attorneys general and nonprofit organizations, Trump’s executive actions seem destined for prolonged back-and-forth legal battles before they reach a favorable Supreme Court.

“If this was being undertaken pursuant to the executive orders on [diversity, equity, and inclusion], why would the administration issue such broad, unclear and confusing directions?” Tad DeHaven, a policy analyst from the noted libertarian Cato Institute, told CBS MoneyWatch. This is likely because Trump’s administration knew the memo sat on shaky legal grounds but is pursuing more significant gains. Trump appears to be fighting, for example, against the Impoundment Control Act, in which a president can defer budgeted funds to “provide for contingencies” or to achieve savings as explicitly provided by law. However, the president cannot withhold funding to achieve policy goals—which this administration claims is unconstitutional. So, in truth, Trump isn’t only fighting against these laws, but against the basic constitutional architecture of federal administration.

For now, Pritzker’s confrontational approach may serve as a model for opposing what he sees as executive overreach: “If you come for my people,” he tweeted, “you come through me.” And as @CalltoActivism tweeted, “This is how we do it. Call out Trump’s lies to the camera, bold, strong action. Hold him accountable, every single time.”


The Mary Sue is supported by our audience. When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn a small affiliate commission. Learn more about our Affiliate Policy
Author
Image of Kahron Spearman
Kahron Spearman
Kahron Spearman is an Austin-based writer and a contributing writer for The Mary Sue. Kahron brings experience from The Austin Chronicle, Texas Highways Magazine, and Texas Observer. Be sure to follow him on his existential substack (kahron.substack.com) or X (@kahronspearman) for more.