Judge blocks Trump fine

A federal judge on Friday prevented the Trump administration from properly raising the $1.2-line

The decision is a major win for universities that have struggled to resist the President’s efforts to punish “worst” universities that he says have provided encouraging skills and agreed to follow encouraging standards.

A spokesperson for the US Department of Justice did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The first order, issued by the US District Judge Rita F. Lin of the Northern California district, granted moots – for now – almost all parts of making $ 584 million in medical, scientific and financial examples to the Los Angeles Computer.

The government said that it rejected UThe funds after finding that UCLA violated the law by using the faculty of FRUCISISTIONS, to recognize the complaints of Transgender sex, and not to oppose the complaints of Antisesthetician in 2024 – means that UC refused.

The resolution proposal outlined extensive changes to pressure the UCA – and by extension the entire UC – OneOlogical right by calling for the elimination of environmental studies, tolerance of young health workers, tolerance of free speech restrictions and more.

“Administrations and senior faculty members are involved in a concerted campaign to purge ”’leftist,” and ‘socialist’ ideas from leading universities in our country,” he wrote in his opinion. “The authorities of the Agency, together with the President and the Vice President, have repeatedly announced and announced the money for the investigation of knee-jerk, knee-jerk, gender-based, among other things. The defendants do not bring anything to contradict this.”

“It’s not advertised,” Lin added, “that this exact playbook is being done right now at the University of California.”

Universities including Columbia, Brown and Cornell have agreed to pay the government millions for violations similar to those facing UCLA similar to those facing UCLA similar to UCLA facing UCLA facing. The University of Pennsylvania and the University of Virginia also reached agreements with the Trump administration that focused, respectively, on awareness of pedestrian recognition and halting transgender efforts, equality and inclusion efforts.

Friday’s decision, for the time being, saves the UC program from continuing the negotiations entered into with reluctance by the Federal Government to avoid cuts in grants throughout the Federal Fund program. Always. UC President James B. Milliken said the $1.2 billion FICE would have “totally damaged UC” and the program, under fire from the Trump Administration.

This is not the first time that a judge has criticized the Trump administration for its higher education campaign. Massachusetts-based U.S. District Court Judge Allison Burroughs in September ordered the government to return billions in cuts to Harvard. But that case didn’t veer directly into settlement negotiations.

Those talks with UC have been slow. In a hearing in court last week, said a lawyer for the Department of Justice, there is no evidence that any kind of cooperation with the United States will happen in the future. ” The lawyer argued that the settlement offer was the only concept that did not receive the approval of the UC.

Because of that, he said, the case was wrong. LIN YOU CAN OPEN.

“Plaintiffs’ injuries are already very real. With each passing day, UCLA continues to be denied the opportunity to win new grants,” he wrote. “And many UC faculty and staff have posted statements explaining how the actions of the defendants have already set the tone for the entire UC system.”

This case was brought by many faculty and staff organizations and organizations from all 10 campuses of 10 campuses, which claimed that the Federal Government violated their amendment rights and the constitutional right to due process. C, which has avoided pressing the government directly in court, was not a party to the suit.

“This is not only a historic case – brought by all labor organizations and the Faculty Union at UC – but also an amazing win,” said Veena Dubal, professor of common law, American Assn. For university professors, there are members who have worked at UC’s international campuses.

Dubal called the decision “a fighting point in the battle to preserve free speech and research in the best public school system in the world.”

Asked about Friday’s result, an EC spokesperson said:

Zoé Hamstead, the chair of external relations and legal affairs of the UC Council is the faculty at hand., “I am glad that the court confirmed our first amendment rights.”

This organization is the UMBROLLA group of beauty organizations on UC campuses.

Hamstead, a professor of urban and regional planning at UC Berkeley, said he was “very proud to be part of the faculty representing teachers, researchers, and staff at the University of California who are throwing authoritarian power.”

Anna Matomitz, associate professor at UCLA’s school of education and information for the Los Angeles Campus Association, said that her chapters are “very happy with this decision, which will put a pause on the passing of the EC.”

“UCLA’s ability to stand up to this scandal, which continues to show that when it comes to administration targeting the heart of higher education, fighting back is the only option,” said MarkWoWitz.

Lin’s injunction is not a final measure, which will continue through the legal process as it determines whether a permanent injunction is warranted. The government can also file an appeal with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals as it has done for other cases, including UC investigators who were reimbursed by the National Institutes of Health among other agencies.

An appeals court hearing in that case was held on Friday; A decision is pending.