Trump freezes $11 billion in infrastructure across 12 Democratic states

File FOIA request for OMB and Army Corps internal memos justifying project freeze

Request documents from OMB via foia.whitehouse.gov and Army Corps at usace.army.mil/foia showing: (1) criteria used to label projects 'low priority,' (2) whether projects were evaluated on merit or geographic/political location, (3) emails or memos from Trump directing retaliation against Democratic states, (4) whether freeze complies with Water Resource Development Act authorization requirements. Document shows whether this violates the Impoundment Control Act (31 U.S.C. § 1341) which bars presidential withholding of congressionally appropriated funds without notification and congressional approval.

Demand Congressional investigation into Impoundment Control Act violations

Contact House and Senate Appropriations Committees. Request they investigate whether Trump's $46 billion in freezes across Democratic states violates the Impoundment Control Act. Request they demand OMB and Trump provide written legal justification for each freeze. Propose legislation requiring OMB to notify Congress 48 hours before any project freeze exceeding $100 million, with automatic resumption unless Congress votes to approve within 45 days. Reference 1974 Act as precedent after Nixon's similar abuses (Pub. L. 93-344).

Calculate economic impact of infrastructure freeze on Democratic-led states

Using Bureau of Labor Statistics (bls.gov), calculate construction jobs lost per $1 billion frozen. For New York $7 billion freeze: estimate jobs lost (roughly 50-75 per $100M), wages foregone, tax revenue loss. Request economic impact analyses from state budget offices. Compare this cost to Trump's claim that freezes offset shutdown costs. Share analysis with state legislatures, congressional delegations, and media to demonstrate false justification for freeze.

Track whether 'sanctuary jurisdiction' criteria matches federal immigration policy or infrastructure merit

Request list of 12 states frozen and compare to federal list of designated 'sanctuary jurisdictions' from DHS. Determine whether OMB targeted states based on immigration policies (Keep Washington Working Act, others) or infrastructure project merit. If targeting is retaliatory rather than merit-based, document as unconstitutional retaliation. File amicus brief in any resulting litigation arguing Vought's actions violate Article I appropriations power and equal protection.

Organize multistate constitutional challenge to freeze

Coordinate with attorneys general of affected states (New York Cuomo's office first; atg.ny.gov). Propose joint federal lawsuit arguing: (1) freeze violates Impoundment Control Act, (2) violates Article I appropriations power, (3) constitutes unconstitutional retaliation against Democratic-led states in violation of 10th Amendment and equal protection. File in federal district court in New York with standing based on $7 billion impact. Seek preliminary injunction to restore funding pending trial. Reference Lincoln v. Vigil (507 U.S. 191 (1993)) for appropriations law precedent.

Request Army Corps of Engineers testimony on project selection criteria

Contact House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure (transportation.house.gov). Request Army Corps Director and regional engineers testify on: (1) how projects were originally prioritized and approved, (2) whether freeze criteria differ from original approval standards, (3) whether immigration/sanctuary status should factor into infrastructure merit decisions. Request they explain whether freeze is based on new information or political retaliation. This creates public record of how federal agency responds to political pressure.