Ireland Owens
Reporter
A federal judge on Tuesday blocked the Trump administration from withholding billions of dollars in funding for electric vehicle (EV) charger infrastructure from 14 states.
U.S. District Judge Tana Lin partially granted a preliminary injunction that was intended to unlock funding for the EV charger buildout. The ruling comes after President Donald Trump’s Department of Transportation (DOT) in February announced that it was halting billions of dollars in funding for the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula Program, a $5 billion dollar program that was established by the Biden administration to install a network of EV chargers across the United States.
“Congress appropriated $5 billion to fund a National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (‘NEVI’) Formula Program, the purpose of which was — and still is — ‘to strategically deploy electric vehicle charging infrastructure and to establish an interconnected network to facilitate data collection, access, and reliability,’” according to Lin’s order.
The order does not apply to Minnesota, the District of Columbia and Vermont, which she ruled did not prove that they would be faced with “irreparable harm” if the funds were not immediately unlocked. Still, the Trump administration has until July 2 to appeal the ruling.
Former President Joe Biden notably led a sweeping effort to subsidize the production and adoption of EVs during his sole term. Though the Biden administration vowed to roll out a network of half a million EV chargers across the U.S. by 2030 through the NEVI program, the move faced a spate of slowdowns and logistical hurdles.
Biden appointed Lin to the federal bench in 2021. In an April 2021 press release announcing several of Biden’s judicial nominations, including Lin, the White House wrote that the candidates “speak to the President’s strong belief that the federal judiciary should reflect the proud diversity of the nation, both in terms of personal and professional backgrounds.”
“Another day, another liberal judicial activist making nonsensical rulings from the bench because they hate President Trump,” a DOT spokesperson said in a statement provided to the Daily Caller News Foundation. “The Biden-[former Transportation Secretary Pete] Buttigieg NEVI program guidance was a disaster and failed miserably to deliver EV chargers. While we assess our legal options, the order does not stop our ongoing work to reform the program so it actually works for the American people, which continues apace.”
A White House spokesperson told the DCNF that since the NEVI Formula Program was enacted, approximately 84% of the program’s funds remain unobligated and 75% of the states that filed the lawsuit to block the DOT’s review have failed to spend even a third of the funds that they have received.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Did Biden appoint her?
Did Biden “Sign” the appointment??
Or did Autopen actually appoint her???
I believe that Federal judges are nominated by the POTUS and their nomination is confirmed by the Senate via the Advice and Consent process in the Constitution. Therefore, there are many other politicians complicit in the appointment.
However, if the autopen was used, and if it was without the express direction of the POTUS, was the nomination valid?
The Senate confirms. And the Congress passed the laws to order the chargers and appropriated the funds to build them. Biden does not matter, nor does the judge matter, nor does Trump’s policy preference matter. The law is the law … only in dictatorships is the law whatever the dictator dictates. We are not a dictatorship.
Trump can very easily get what he wants, not by executive order, but by working with his Congressional majorities. The problem for Trump and for the people who favor his policies is that Trump is bleeding support left and right with his continuous scofflawing of the Constitution and our laws. The United States of America is not about Trump – the United States of America is about the People and the Constitution that protects us all from dictators.
There is an election a little more than a year from now. The economy is tanking, tariffs are pissing off all but a few diehards, and Trump’s dictatorial actions are pissing off a majority of Americans by all polls taken so far in his Presidency. He is underwater in all the polls now by large margins. If Trump loses the House next year, his presidency is all but over. He is going to lose most of the Supreme Court cases that hinge on him ignoring the Constitution and the law – SCOTUS is conservative, but that does not mean SCOTUS favors dictatorship just because the dictator claims to be conservative (but in many many ways, Trump is NOT conservative).
Be careful what you wish for.
I know you know what you are advocating that is why the Dow is now at a higher level than ever achieved before Trump was elected Nov 5 2024.
43,386.84 Dow close Jun 26 2025 current close
43,275.91 Dow close Oct 18 2025 Highest close before Nov 5 2024
Typo Alert: “…Oct 18 2025…” should be “…Oct 18 2024…”
If you spot a typo after posting a comment, click on the small gear wheel that appears in the lower right hand corner of comment box if you put the mouse pointer in the box and then follow the prompts. You have a five minute window for making corrections.
Thanks Never spotted it till your post, old age I guess.
Hope never achieves reality.
The economy is tanking? Define tanking.
The problem is the push for a uni-party autocratic government, which has been ongoing for decades. \
Pelosi was a master class proponent of this to the extend that Congressmen left the Democrat party because they were being force to vote against their beliefs and those of their constituents.
Trump is neither a dictator, nor acting as one. This is a spin doctored fairytale created to punish Trump due to flipping to Republican in 2009. In 2008 he was assisting H. Clinton with her campaign.
Trump is using the tools of the trade that every President has used through out history.
Be careful how you respond. I am not 100% in agreement with the many policies of the current Administration, nor am I in favor of 100% of the means being used. I see better pathways that are not pursued. That is true for every President going back to Washington.
I have read many appropriations bills cover to cover and the dominate phrase against each item is, if funding is available in the Treasury and not allocated to another project. We are running in a deficit, therefore the President gets to decide what is funded and what is not.
Born: March 26, 1940 (age 85 years)
Retirement & Survivors Benefits: Life Expectancy Calculator
Additional Life Expectancy (in years) 7
Estimated Total Years 92.5
“Congressmen left the Democrat party because” they didn’t want to wait for it?
Not a case in point.
Longevity numbers were for the 52nd speaker of the United States House of Representatives. Like the once senior Senator from Massachusetts, she’d be favored to win elections posthumously.
TDS much? Please try to get a grip on reality. I don’t know what polls your looking at but Rasmussen (the only poll I trust) shows president Trump doing quite well. So far his cases are doing very well at SCOTUS.
Any money spent on chargers is wasted. EV’s are dead, presently they are wiggling in their death throes for the second time.It would be better if the appropriated funds were directed somewhere else.
Well those at the bottom of the Pacific are not wiggling in any case.
They probably wiggled on the way down though.😉😂
No doubt.
“National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula Program: This part of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, provides $5 billion to states to build out a network of EV chargers along designated routes, particularly along the Interstate Highway System.”
If states are not using the money they have been given to do that, then it is incumbent upon the Executive Branch to withdraw the funds and return them to Congress. Congress provided the money for a specific purpose, not just to donate to states. The Executive Branch is tasked with the responsibility of ensuring the money is not misspent. The federal government cannot demand states to install ev chargers if they choose not to, even if the federal government pays for it.
Congress could authorize billions of dollars for states to build bordellos, but if a state refused to do it, they don’t get to keep the money.
Correct.
We once had a gas station (diesel too) in the downtown area of our upper Midwest city. Gone. The land was too valuable, and most cars “lived” outside downtown or in suburbs where gasoline was plentiful.
Charging “stations” aren’t quick stop or stop and go services which means that they can’t make a profit while sitting on a very valuable piece of downtown real estate. Gasoline and diesel, on the other hand could be but apparently there is not enough demand downtown.
There are places all over the world that now ban charging in parking garages or within 50 feet of another car or building.
I find it distressing when I see gas stations adding charging stations. That is a towering inferno waiting to pop.
I don’t love EVs but the charging station footprint need not exceed a plug mounted on the posts that hold up parking meters. SN4 points out the bigger safety issue. If government agencies were not advocating EVs it would have to outlaw them.
Ralph Nader and his “Unsafe at any speed”, we need someone like him to bring in some EV sanity.
” … but the charging station footprint need not exceed a plug mounted on the posts that hold up parking meters … “
Plus a chunk of pavement for the cars to sit on while being charged as well as clear pavement/driveway for arriving and departing cars. Just like a gasoline station except that it takes a lot longer to charge-up and EV than to fill-up a gasoline or diesel car or truck.
The charger footprint, perhaps, but not the vehicle charging footprint. 50 feet separation from the EV to anything that could be damaged is not the typical spacing of parking meters, plus 50 feet to the sidewalk and 50 feet to the traffic lanes. That is non trivial.
FYI, multiple EV manufacturers are making the 50 foot recommendation. China and elsewhere are banning charging in parking garages.
In addition, getting the juice to the pm poles would require significant infrastructure costs, ripping up parking spaces or sidewalks or both to lay the power cable.
So your vision of economical accessible EV charging is not thought through completely.
Whilst Congress can appropriate funding … only the President can actually spend (or not spend) it.
.
When Congress authorized (in 2014) a billion dollar loan to Ukraine … VP Joe Biden is on record as threatening to withhold that approved spending … unless Ukraine sack a prosecutor investigating a company his son was intimately & financially involved in.
.
Well … Son of a Bitch, that prosecutor was sacked that very day.
.
It’s (D)ifferent when Democrats do it.
Technically it was a loan guarantee that was on the table. Technically V. Shokin was not fired, he resigned months later. Verkhovna Rada refused it the first time but reluctantly accepted it when re-submitted.
I’d rather ask congress to do its job than expand the powers of the presidency to compensate. The biggest downside to allowing presidents to veto legislation by withholding funds is that there could be a new system every 4 years- and since appropriation (should) lead spending by a about a year that means 25% of funding for politicized projects would be expected to occasionally disappear.
Edit add: I made a leap from “president not funding certain things” to “line item veto”. I think the logic stands.
I apologize. I did not mean my nit picking to be an argument against your points.
Does it matter it was a loan guarantee or a loan? No.
Does it matter if Shokin was fired or resigned? No.
Does it matter that Biden hard pressed a quid pro quo? Absolutely.
And Trump said no. That crap is over. You want an EV charger? You pay for it.
This ruling is not about policy – it is about Constitutional powers of the President vs. Congress. Congress enacted the law, not Biden. Congress appropriated the funds, and Presidents are required by the Constitution to faithfully carry out the law which includes spending money Congress appropriated on programs Congress ordered.
If spending money on EV charging network expansions is to be stopped, Trump has to go to Congress and request that Congress rescind the appropriation.
Presidents are not Kings – their powers are explicitly limited by the Constitution exactly as intended by the Founders and as held previously by Supreme Court decisions.
Who the judge is or who appointed them does not matter. What matters is the Constitution and the law.
Trump can get this done, but he can’t do it solely by executive order… governing this nation by executive order is equivalent to dictatorship.
No matter the funding, pigs can’t fly. We are experiencing dikastocracy as much or more than dictatorship.
Duane’s analysis is correct. Congress passed the law, signed by the president. As long as the law is in effect (not repealed by congress), the trump administration has to spend the money for the charging stations.
I agree that it is stupid to spend the money, but that is what the law is currently. The Inflation reduction act is stupid, but that is the current law.
Thanks for the down votes –
I explained the correct application of the law. I personally think the IRA is crap. But that is the law as it currently exists. We are stuck with it until congress repeals the law.
Giving me a down vote because you dont like the correct answer is a little immature.
Except the bill has provisions that allow the President to not spend money not in the Treasury.
Not true. The provisions in the bill explicitly require the funding be in the Treasury and not allocated to another program. If the funding is not in the Treasury, the President can elect to not borrow to fund it.
can you give a citation to the statute for the provision
Nice – a downvote instead of providing the citation for the specific statute that allows the president not to spend money appropriated by congress.
I did not down vote.
Go read the bill, all 1500 pages of it.
The citation I mention is a clause for each line item in the appropriation.
Go back to the Huffington Post, Duane. Your type ain’t wanted here.
Despite all the -1s, Duane sounds right. If the problem is a sh—y congress, then fix the sh—y congress.
yes – both Duane, Harold Kevin and myself are correct. Congress appropriated the money, signed into law, the president has to spend it, unless there is specific language in the statute that allows the president to suspend the spending.
This his highschool level civics.
Every line item in every appropriations bills contains the clause
(paraphrased) if the money is in the Treasury and not allocated to a separate program.
If there is not enough funding available in the Treasury to pay for everything (we have been in deficit spending for years, not enough money for everything) then the President gets to pick what is funded and what has to wait.
You don’t deserve all those red down votes.
I did not down vote, but consider that you have proof your words were read.
This ruling is absolutely about policy. It is about whether a judge can dictate national policy.
So in America, power over policy actually rests with the party that can appoint sympathetic judges to the court system. These judges then decide cases on the basis of whether they support the decisions made by the party. What a shining light on the hill America is for the rest of us less fortunate citizens of other countries!
SCOTUS seems to have made some change to the power of lower courts to obstruct POTUS
I’ve got two words for that judge: therapy!
How about we just waste the money and not get any chargers installed just like Biden did? Also consider standard government stalling tactics. Also demand studies and investigations before any disbursement.
I worked for a number of years in a Government Agency (not at liberty to disclose).
We received an annual appropriation. Towards the end of the year, any funds not spent were subject to a “funding sweep” in which the unallocated or otherwise not transacted funds were gathered up and returned. Congress approved the appropriation. I do not see how this is different.
At a minimum, a multi year spending plan that does not meet its obligations should return the unspent funding for that year, not carry it forward. To do otherwise is fiscally irresponsible, IMHO.
“To do otherwise is fiscally irresponsible,”
A perfect description of the deep state. 😉
Thank you for your support. Can I count on your vote in 28?
/humor
SCOTUS just ruled today that district federal judges can’t just put in nation wide injuctions. Haven’t read the decision yet but it sounds like there are still exceptions where they can. Anyway, I wonder how that decision impacts this decision on appeal since we have a district judge telling the president what he must do.
https://dailysceptic.org/2025/06/27/supreme-court-bombshell-ruling-declares-individual-judges-cannot-block-trumps-policies/
YESSS….APP YOURS lefties 🤣 it was about time
Just a little clarity. Congress approves appropriations for one year at a time. October 1 is when the new appropriations go out (assuming no CRs).
The IRA was a multiyear plan, but could only be funded year by year.
It is common that money not spent in the current year is not pushed forward, it is returned to the general fund (aka the Treasury). Been more than a decade since last I was involved in the details, so I cannot claim it is done exactly that way today. I would be surprised if it were much different.
This is now illegal Judiciary malfeasance. Wham bam, thank you ma’am. District judges have forever been placed in their cages!
The judge is just enforcing the law. If you don’t like it, ask Congress to pass a new law.
judges do not enforce anything, they interpret law and rely on an Executive Branch to enforce
The judge is just enforcing the law.
judges do not enforce anything
How does Friday’s SCOTUS decision impact this order?
The last time billions was thrown at this effort, only a handful of chargers were installed. Where did the rest of the money go?
My gut tells me it is to fund the riots in LA and other places.