New York: An Indian-American federal judge has found himself at the center of a political storm after blocking the Trump administration’s attempt to freeze nearly $10 billion in federal welfare and child care funding for five Democratic-led states. Judge Arun Subramanian of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) on January 9, pausing the funding freeze for 14 days while the court considers fuller legal arguments.
The disputed funds support three major programs: the Child Care and Development Fund, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), and Social Services Block Grants. Together, they provide child care, cash assistance, job training, homelessness prevention, and social services to low-income and vulnerable families. California alone was set to receive nearly half of the $10 billion at stake.
The ruling came in response to an emergency lawsuit filed by the attorneys general of California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, and New York. The states argue that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) lacked both statutory and constitutional authority to halt funds already appropriated by Congress. They also contend the freeze was politically motivated and unsupported by evidence, despite administration claims of widespread fraud and misuse of taxpayer dollars.
In his brief order, Judge Subramanian said the states had demonstrated sufficient grounds for emergency relief. He cited their likelihood of success on the merits, the risk of irreparable harm to families who rely on the programs, and the public interest in maintaining uninterrupted aid. Importantly, the judge did not rule on the administration’s fraud allegations, instead preserving the status quo while legal proceedings continue.
Trump administration officials have defended the freeze as part of the president’s “America First” agenda and expanded oversight under HHS’s “Defend the Spend” system. The agency has also sought extensive documentation from states, including years of data and sensitive personal information, a demand the states argue is overly broad and unlawful.
The decision triggered a wave of online backlash from MAGA supporters. Judge Subramanian was labeled a “Biden appointee” and a “DEI hire,” while some comments descended into xenophobic and racist attacks, including calls for his deportation despite his U.S. citizenship. Senior Trump adviser Stephen Miller criticized the ruling, alleging it forces taxpayers to fund “daycare scams,” while Elon Musk described the decision as “problematic” on X.
Born in Pittsburgh in 1979 to Indian immigrant parents, Subramanian previously clerked for senior federal judges and U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. He is not alone in facing such criticism; other Indian-American judges, including Amit Mehta, Vince Chhabria, and Indira Talwani, have encountered similar backlash for rulings that stalled Trump administration policies.
