A federal judge has ruled that the Trump administration’s decision to drastically cut funding and dismantle AmeriCorps likely violated federal law, ordering the restoration of funds to the volunteer service programs across two dozen states. The ruling, issued by U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman, grants a preliminary injunction sought by a coalition of 24 Democratic states, challenging the administration’s actions as unlawful under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA).
Background of the Case
The controversy began when the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), under the Trump administration, cut $400 million in funding to AmeriCorps and terminated around 85% of its workforce. This drastic reduction was part of the administration’s broader effort to shrink the size of the federal government and bureaucracy. However, the states contended that these cuts, which occurred in April 2025, were made without proper procedure, notably without public notice or comment as required by law.
Judge’s Ruling
In her 86-page order, Judge Boardman found that the administration’s actions likely violated the APA because the changes to AmeriCorps were implemented without following the notice-and-comment rulemaking process. According to the APA, any significant changes to federal programs, including reductions or terminations of services, must be made after soliciting public comments to ensure transparency and public participation.
Congress’ mandate for AmeriCorps, passed in the previous year, specified that changes to the program could only be made through this formal public process. When the Trump administration implemented the sweeping cuts, including the termination of hundreds of service programs, it caused substantial disruptions and went against the law by failing to allow public input.
Congressional Concerns
In the ruling, Judge Boardman cited comments from Senator Barbara Mikulski, a Maryland lawmaker who was a key proponent of the amendment requiring public notice for changes to AmeriCorps. Mikulski had stated that the goal of this amendment was to prevent such abrupt disruptions to programs serving communities, which exactly occurred when the Trump administration made drastic cuts without public feedback.
Impact on AmeriCorps and Volunteers
AmeriCorps, a volunteer service program that places individuals in communities to address social needs, faced significant disruption when the cuts were implemented. The program provides critical support to various sectors, including education, health services, and environmental conservation. The sudden termination of these services left many communities without the support they had relied on for years.
The Legal Challenge
The states challenging the cuts argued that these actions were arbitrary, capricious, and without proper legal procedures. They contended that the government’s failure to follow the legally required steps had caused harm to volunteer organizations and communities that relied on AmeriCorps programs. The judge agreed, emphasizing that these actions undermined the public’s ability to provide input on matters that directly affected their communities.
Standing and Ruling on Workforce Reduction
However, Judge Boardman did not rule in favor of the states regarding the mass staff terminations or the reduction in force (RIF). While the states had claimed that these actions caused harm, such as delays in grant applications, the judge concluded that the harm was too speculative to establish legal standing. The court ruled that the states could not challenge the staff cuts directly, as the alleged harm did not meet the legal threshold required for the challenge to proceed.
Next Steps
The ruling reinstates the funding to AmeriCorps, allowing the programs to continue operations while further legal proceedings unfold. The administration will now need to engage in the required notice-and-comment process if it wishes to make any permanent changes to the program.
The decision marks a significant victory for state plaintiffs advocating for the integrity of volunteer programs and federal regulations that protect public participation in government decision-making.
This decision serves as a reminder of the importance of transparency in government actions and the need to follow legal procedures when making significant changes to public programs. AmeriCorps, which plays a vital role in communities across the United States, will now have the opportunity to continue its work, and future changes to the program will have to undergo the required public scrutiny.
This case highlights the checks and balances in place to prevent unilateral government actions that could harm local communities, service programs, and public trust in the system.
