White House budget director Russ Vought, who is depicted as the Grim Reaper in a video posted by President Donald Trump during the shutdown in October 2025,  speaks with reporters inside the U.S. Capitol building on July 15, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — Trump administration officials on Friday defended the decision to cancel federal projects in regions of the country that have voted for Democrats, saying the move isn’t political but an effort to reduce the size and scope of government during the shutdown.

Republican leaders in Congress also backed the White House’s decision to punish Democratic voters by unilaterally canceling funding that lawmakers approved on a bipartisan basis. Democrats, however, said it’s an unacceptable escalation that further erodes Congress’ constitutional authority over spending.

“The president and (White House budget director) Russ Vought were not given any additional authority under a shutdown, and they shouldn’t pretend they have it and they shouldn’t act like it and they certainly should not be threatening people,” Senate Appropriations Committee ranking member Patty Murray, D-Wash., said on a call with reporters.

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., gave a bit of a mixed message during a morning press conference, saying that while decisions about which projects to cancel are “tough,” President Donald Trump and other officials “are having fun with” the shutdown on social media.

“Are they taking great pleasure in that? No,” Johnson said, referring to the actual governing. “Is he trolling the Democrats? Yes, because that’s what President Trump does and people are having fun with this.”

Later in the day, Johnson opted to further delay bringing the House back into session, canceling a second week of floor votes, which means the earliest that chamber will return to Capitol Hill is Oct. 14. 

Shutdown ‘is not a joke’

Trump has posted frequently on social media during the shutdown, including a video that depicted House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries wearing a sombrero and a video that appeared to be created by artificial intelligence depicting Vought as the Grim Reaper.

Murray said on the call with reporters that Republicans posting the videos show they are treating the shutdown “as a joke.” 

“This is not a joke. This is real,” Murray said. “They need to stop the taunting. They need to stop the childish behavior. They need to stop hurting people and they need to come and work with us to solve a serious problem in front of our country.”

Jeffries, asked about the social media videos during a press conference, said it shows Republicans are on “defense” over their policies on health care and other issues. 

“Donald Trump has behaved in a deeply unserious and deeply unhinged manner and it’s evidence of the fact that Republicans have a weak argument, so they’ve resorted to deepfake videos and to lying about the nature of the policy decisions,” Jeffries said.

Projects axed in Chicago, New York, blue states

Johnson said he spoke earlier this week with Vought — one of the authors of Project 2025 who said previously he wanted “bureaucrats to be traumatically affected” — and that Vought “takes no pleasure in this.”

“Russ wants to see a smaller, more efficient, more lean, effective federal government, as we do. But he doesn’t want people to lose jobs. He doesn’t want to do that,” Johnson said. “But that’s his responsibility. So he’s very carefully, methodically, very deliberately looking through that to see which decisions can be made in the best interest of the American people. That’s his obligation and that’s his real desire.”

Typically during a government shutdown, federal employees are categorized as exempt, meaning they keep working without pay, or are placed on furlough. Both categories receive back pay once Congress votes to approve a stopgap spending bill.

But Vought has indicated he wants to use the shutdown as an excuse to lay off federal workers en masse, a step not taken during past funding lapses. He’s also taken to social media several times to announce canceled or halted projects in areas of the country that don’t regularly vote for Republicans.

Vought wrote in a post on Wednesday, shortly after the shutdown began, that $18 billion in Transportation Department funding for the Hudson Tunnel Project and the Second Ave Subway in New York City was put “on hold.” Both are in Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer and Jeffries’ home state.

Vought then said the Energy Department would cancel $8 billion in climate funding that was slated to go to projects in California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Vermont and Washington.

The Washington State Standard reported some of the funding would have gone toward the Pacific Northwest Hydrogen Hub and Source New Mexico posted an article detailing a few impacted projects, including funds to the “New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology for the third phase of a project … to develop a storage hub at a commercial scale within (the) San Juan basin.”

Additionally, Vought on Friday froze $2.1 billion in Transportation Department funding for the “Red Line Extension and the Red and Purple Modernization Project” in Chicago, writing it was “put on hold to ensure funding is not flowing via race-based contracting.”

Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin represents Illinois, and the state’s governor, JB Pritzker, has been in a public back-and-forth with Trump over immigration enforcement, which the administration has heightened in Chicago. Pritzker has repeatedly rebuffed Trump’s requests to bring in the National Guard.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said during the press conference with Speaker Johnson that it makes sense the Trump administration would implement the shutdown through a political lens.

“I think they’re going to make decisions that are consistent with their priorities,” Thune said. “And yes, they’re going to have a different political view of the world than the Democrats might have.”

Hatch Act questions

The actions of Trump administration officials have raised questions about whether they could be in violation of the Hatch Act, a 1939 law that “limits certain political activities of federal employees.” 

The Office of Special Counsel writes on its website the law is meant to “ensure that federal programs are administered in a nonpartisan fashion, to protect federal employees from political coercion in the workplace, and to ensure that federal employees are advanced based on merit and not based on political affiliation.”

Any federal employee found to have violated the law can face removal from service or a fine of up to $1,000, among other possible repercussions. 

Public Citizen has filed numerous complaints against the Trump administration, alleging that banners and messages posted on government websites about the shutdown violate the Hatch Act. 

“Even for an administration that flouts ethics guidelines regularly, these messages are a particularly egregious and clear-cut sign that Trump and his cabinet see themselves as above the law,” Craig Holman, a government ethics expert with Public Citizen, wrote in a statement. 

As with many of the Trump administration’s actions, any new precedent set by the Republican administration could be used by a future Democratic president in a way that would very likely be harmful to Republican voters and regions of the country that consistently support GOP policies.

Layoffs still threatened

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said during an afternoon briefing that administration officials are trying to determine where to make additional spending cuts and layoffs during the shutdown. 

“The Office of Management and Budget is in constant communication and contact right now with our Cabinet secretaries and agencies across the board to identify, unfortunately, where layoffs have to be made and where cuts have to happen,” Leavitt said. “But again, the Democrats have an opportunity to prevent this if they vote to reopen the government.”

Leavitt declined to say whether the administration would back away from plans to lay off federal workers by the thousands or cancel funding for projects in Democratic areas if Republicans and Democrats in Congress strike a deal to reopen government. 

Leavitt said the “blueprint” for shrinking the size and scope of the federal government is whatever the president and administration officials come up with, after being asked by a Fox News reporter about Trump writing in a social media post earlier this week that Vought was “of PROJECT 2025 Fame,” after the president repeatedly distanced himself from the document on the campaign trail.

U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Susan Collins, R-Maine, speaks with reporters inside the Capitol building in Washington, D.C., on Monday, Sept. 29, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — The chairwoman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee said Tuesday the Government Accountability Office should sue the Trump administration over its efforts to freeze or unilaterally cancel spending approved by Congress. 

“I believe that GAO, which is empowered under the Impoundment and Budget Control Act of 1974 to sue in cases, should do so,” Sen. Susan Collins said. “The GAO has found seven instances in which the (impoundments) violate the act and it has standing to sue.”

Collins, R-Maine, also told reporters that she doesn’t agree with the Supreme Court’s decision last week on its emergency docket that allows the Trump administration to cancel $4 billion in foreign aid. 

“I disagree with the Supreme Court’s temporary decision, but it was not a decision that delved into the merits of the case,” Collins said. “That’s yet to come.”

Collins, one of the more vocal members of her party over preserving Congress’ constitutional power of the purse, said “Well, let’s see,” when asked if she expects the GAO, a government watchdog agency, would win a lawsuit over the Trump administration impounding funds. 

The GAO and White House budget office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

Funds frozen for libraries, medical research, FEMA

Republicans in Congress have been either supportive or relatively quiet about the Trump administration’s efforts to freeze or cancel funding approved by Congress. 

The GAO has cited the Trump administration for illegally impounding funding for electric vehicle charging, museums and libraries, Head Start, energy efficiency upgrades in K-12 schools, funding for medical research at the National Institutes of Health and funding for the Federal Emergency Management Agency. 

Senate Appropriations Committee ranking member Patty Murray, D-Wash., released a statement earlier this week rebuking the Trump administration’s actions after the GAO released its seventh impoundment decision. 

“Today, we have another stark reminder of how President Trump’s lawless assault on our spending laws is hurting real people in every part of the country—as funding is held up to address homelessness, prepare for disasters, and much more,” Murray wrote. “It is time for Republicans to join us in insisting that every last penny that is owed to the American people gets out to the American people.”

(L-R) Adrien Wood, Aeriana Wood, and Juliana Wood have a picture taken by Michael Race in front of the Alligator Alcatraz sign at the entrance to the Dade-Collier Training and Transition Airport on July 10, 2025, in Ochopee. The site is the location of the state-managed immigration detention facility in the Florida Everglades that officials have named “Alligator Alcatraz.” (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

A federal appeals court last week ordered the “Alligator Alcatraz” detention center to remain open partially because it lacked federal ties. A week later, Florida formally applied for federal funds.

The state’s request for reimbursement for its spending on the migrant detention facility in the heart of the Everglades came just days after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit hit pause on a federal judge’s order shutting down the center over environmental concerns. The 2-1 vote claimed that federal environmental laws don’t apply because Florida officials haven’t used any federal money.

But less than eight days after the ruling — which stayed all aspects of the case — the Florida Division of Emergency Management asked the Federal Emergency Management Agency to be reimbursed, a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson told the Florida Phoenix in an email.

“The State of Florida submitted an application for reimbursement to [FEMA],” the spokesperson said. Although they didn’t comment on what day the application was made nor for how much money, this confirmed Politico’s reporting that FDEM’s executive director, Kevin Guthrie, said the state had applied for federal money.

Gov. Ron DeSantis has long promised that Florida would be reimbursed for its detention center spending, although neither his office nor FDEM ever clarified when they planned to ask for the money. Federal authorities similarly lauded the facility as a joint effort, but showed no signs of chipping in until last week.

“Under President Trump’s leadership, we are working at turbo speed on cost-effective and innovative ways to deliver on the American people’s mandate for mass deportations of criminal illegal aliens,” the DHS official said. “These new facilities are in large part to be funded by FEMA’s Shelter and Services Program.”

The Shelter and Services program allocated $608.4 million toward FEMA’s new Detention Support Grant Program, specifically designed to expedite Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s mass detention and deportation agenda. If FEMA approves Florida’s request, the money will be awarded by Sep. 30. The Everglades facility is estimated to cost around $450 million for the year.

The attorney general’s office redirected questions to FDEM, which did not respond to questions about the application’s timeline.

‘So what do you say, judges?’

In a 2-1 decision on Sep. 4, the Eleventh Circuit both paused federal trial judge Kathleen Williams’ order to shut down the facility and fully stayed the case. The lawsuit was brought against the state by the Miccosukee Tribe and environmental groups Friends of the Everglades and the Center for Biodiversity.

They claimed the center, located within the Everglades and Big Cypress National Preserve, was harming the environment and violating the National Environmental Policy Act.

But judges Barbara Lagoa and Elizabeth Branch, both Trump appointees, ruled that Williams had erred by applying the federal law to a center that had exclusively received state funds. Florida hadn’t even applied for federal reimbursement, they argued. The activists have since asked the appeals court to reconsider their decision to halt the lawsuit.

If the judges don’t, Miami attorney Joseph DeMaria said the plaintiffs would be stymied unless they can “un-stay” the case — even though the majority opinion was largely predicated on the lack of federal ties.

“Unless they can get the case unstuck, there’s nothing they can do,” said DeMaria, who once worked as a prosecutor with the Justice Department’s Miami Organized Crime Strike Force. [The state] played it cute by saying, ‘We haven’t formally agreed yet, so federal law doesn’t apply.'”

He posed a rhetorical question to the appellate judges on the case: “You said that the feds haven’t agreed to pay, so there’s no jurisdiction to enforce the federal environmental law, but then almost immediately after you said that, they went and agreed to pay. So what do you say, judges?”

Attorneys for the Friends of the Everglades declined to comment, while the governor’s office, the Miccosukee Tribe, and the Center for Biodiversity did not respond to requests for comment.