A federal appeals court on Saturday ruled that the Trump administration’s decision to remove a public database of federal spending data was unlawful, ordering the agency to restore the website by August 15. The court’s unanimous decision, issued by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals panel, underscored the constitutional principle that Congress holds sole authority over the purse and the obligation to disclose federal spending to the public. The ruling reinforces the judiciary’s role in preserving the balance of power among branches of government, as the administration had claimed the database compromised its ability to manage funds and potentially exposed confidential information.
The decision was based on a lawsuit brought by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and the Protect Democracy group, which argued that the administration’s shutdown of the database violated congressional oversight. The D.C. Circuit Court’s ruling was joined by two of the three judges, with Justice Karen Henderson, a George H.W. Bush appointee, criticizing the administration’s effort as an affront to Congress’ constitutional authority. She emphasized that the separation of powers requires that only Congress can determine the extent of federal spending and its transparency.
The case has broader implications for the separation of powers and the constitutional checks and balances. The court’s ruling came at a time when the conflict over Trump’s authority to dictate federal spending is intensifying on Capitol Hill. The administration’s attempts to reclassify certain funding as optional or to shift funds elsewhere have raised concerns among lawmakers and legal experts. The ruling ensures that the public will continue to have access to data that is essential for transparency and accountability in government spending.
While the decision does not resolve all legal questions surrounding the Trump administration’s spending practices, it clears the way for the public to regain access to the data and reinforces the importance of congressional oversight. The Department of Justice may still seek Supreme Court review, but the current ruling ensures that the database will be restored unless higher courts intervene. The court’s opinion highlights the significance of public disclosure in maintaining trust in government operations and ensuring that the executive branch does not overstep its constitutional bounds.