RI Attorney General Neronha continues to bedevil the Trump Administration with lawsuits
Recent press releases:
February 10: Attorney General Neronha sues Trump Administration for defunding medical and public health innovation research
Attorney General Peter Neronha and 22 other attorneys general sued the Trump Administration, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for unlawfully cutting funds that support cutting-edge medical and public health research at universities and research institutions across the country.
The coalition is challenging the Trump Administration’s attempt to unilaterally cut “indirect cost” reimbursements at every research institution throughout the country. These reimbursements cover expenses to facilitate biomedical research, such as lab, faculty, infrastructure, and utility costs. Without them, the lifesaving and life-changing medical research in which the United States has long been a leader could be compromised.
“This Administration seems hell-bent on upending advancement in this country, and in this instance, that means defunding major medical research initiatives, including those which study diseases that affect many, many Americans,” said Attorney General Neronha. “URI, Brown, and other Rhode Island institutions rely on federal funding to conduct important research around heart disease, Alzheimer’s, and countless other ailments and conditions. This reduction in funding would seriously threaten the future of this research. Further, these funding cuts would lead to Rhode Islanders losing their jobs, thereby negatively impacting their lives and our State economy. People live better, healthier lives because of the medical research conducted at these institutions. If you’ve ever wished for a cure, for better treatment options, for yourself or a loved one, this should feel personal.”
Indirect cost reimbursements are based on each institution’s unique needs, negotiated with the federal government through a carefully regulated process, and then memorialized in an executed agreement. The Trump Administration purports to toss those agreements aside, risking public health and medical advancements. The coalition’s lawsuit seeks to prevent that reckless and illegal conduct.
On Friday, February 7, the NIH announced it would abruptly slash indirect cost rates to an across-the-board 15% rate, which is significantly less than the cost required to perform cutting-edge medical research. The NIH purported to make this cut effective the very next business day, Monday, February 10, giving universities and institutions no time to plan for the enormous budget gaps they are now facing. Without immediate relief, this action could result in the suspension of lifesaving and life-extending clinical trials, disruption of research programs, layoffs, and laboratory closures.
The coalition argues that this action violates the Administrative Procedure Act, including a directive Congress passed during President Trump’s first term to fend off his earlier proposal to drastically cut research reimbursements. That statutory language still prohibits the NIH from requiring categorial and indiscriminate changes to indirect cost reimbursements. The coalition is seeking a court order barring the Trump Administration and NIH from implementing the action.
The NIH is the primary source of federal funding for medical research in the United States. Medical research funding through NIH grants has led to innumerable scientific breakthroughs, including the discovery of treatment for cancers of all types, the first sequencing of DNA, and the development of the MRI. Additionally, dozens of NIH-supported scientists have earned Nobel Prizes for their groundbreaking scientific work.
Most NIH-funding research occurs outside federal government institutions, such as public and private universities and colleges. In Rhode Island, the reduction of indirect cost reimbursements to 15% would significantly disrupt important research operations at the University of Rhode Island (URI), Brown University, Brown Health, and Care New England. For example, URI testified that this directive would result in the University relying on contingency funds to maintain critical functions in the short term, potentially shutting down research projects and laying off staff in the longer term. Further, researchers at Brown University are currently working on a wide array of NIH-funded research initiatives, including on topics such as dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, heart disease, and diabetes prevention. Brown testified that this sudden reduction would abruptly cease current research projects and clinical trials. Finally, indirect cost reimbursement would directly and indirectly lead to the loss of many jobs at these institutions, significantly impacting Rhode Island’s economy.
The attorneys general of Massachusetts, Illinois, and Michigan are co-leading this lawsuit. The attorneys general of Arizona, California, Connecticut, Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin have also joined the suit.
February 9: Attorney General Neronha stands with federal workers in challenging “Fork in the Road” federal buyout
Attorney General Peter Neronha joined a coalition of 21 State attorneys general, standing with the nation’s federal employees in a challenge to the Trump Administration’s federal “buyout” plan. The so-called “Fork in the Road” directive attempts to force federal workers to choose, with only days to decide, between accepting a legally fraught “buyout” and potentially being terminated.
The coalition today moved to file an amicus brief in support of a motion for a temporary restraining order filed by the plaintiffs—the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE); AFGE Local 3707; the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees; and the National Association of Government Employees—against the United States Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM) “Fork in the Road” directive, issued on January 28, 2025. It gave most federal employees little more than a week (until February 6) to accept “deferred resignation,” which purportedly would allow federal workers to resign and retain pay and benefits without showing up to work until September 30, 2025, with an implicit threat that their positions may otherwise be eliminated anyway.
“This reckless directive is both a blatant attack on our nation’s federal employees and all Americans who rely on the important services that they provide,” said Attorney General Neronha. “As the Administration continues its campaign of chaos, we must again consider who benefits and who suffers under these directives. Our federal employees are non-partisan public servants responsible for making sure our government functions in the way that Americans have come to expect. This directive has the potential to cause devastating disruptions to our government in ways that we cannot yet fully comprehend. These employees deserve to maintain their jobs, and we deserve to know why this Administration is so intent on causing harm to the American people.”
The plaintiff unions filed suit in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, emphasizing that the directive and associated FAQs—which were revised multiple times—caused widespread confusion and dismay among federal employees, who were faced with an arbitrary deadline based on a directive that the plaintiff unions assert is illegal and contrary to federal ethics regulations. On February 6, 2025, United States District Court Judge George A. O’Toole, Jr., stayed the purported deadline of the “Fork directive” until Monday, February 10, 2025, with a hearing to be held at 2:00 p.m. that day in Boston.
The coalition of attorneys general emphasized that the loss of indispensable federal employees could devastate cooperative aspects of federal, State, and local government—from those who care for veterans to those who arrive when natural disaster strikes. The brief also describes the coercive nature of the directive to our Nation’s public servants. The coalition urged the court to grant a temporary restraining order to prevent this harm to federal workers—our friends and neighbors—and to protect the public interest.
Attorney General Neronha joined the attorneys general of Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawai’i, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Vermont, Washington, and the District of Columbia on the proposed amicus brief.
February 7: Attorney General Neronha joins multistate coalition in suing to stop Elon Musk and DOGE’s unauthorized access to Americans’ private information
Attorney General Peter Neronha today joined 18 attorneys general in filing a lawsuit against the Trump Administration to stop the unauthorized disclosure of Americans’ private information and sensitive data.
The lawsuit asserts that the Trump administration illegally provided Elon Musk and the so-called “Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)” unauthorized access to the Treasury Department’s central payment system and, therefore, to Americans’ sensitive personal information, including bank account details and Social Security numbers. This expanded access could allow Musk and his team to block federal funds to states and programs providing health care, childcare, and other critical services. With this lawsuit, the coalition of attorneys general is seeking to stop the Trump administration’s illegal granting of access to DOGE, Musk, and others who should not have access to the U.S. Treasury’s payment systems or Americans’ confidential information.
“Americans are increasingly concerned with bad actors gaining unauthorized access to their most sensitive personal information, and now their own government is contributing to that concern,” said Attorney General Neronha. “In 2025, financial and identity fraud are as prevalent as ever, and just as I would advise Rhode Islanders to protect their information from swindlers, same goes here. The President must act in compliance with the law, which means ensuring that those with access to Americans’ social security numbers and bank account information have the appropriate security clearances required by federal law.”
Beginning February 2, 2025, the Trump administration’s Treasury Department adopted a new policy that grants “special government employees,” including Elon Musk and members of DOGE, access to its central payment system operated by the Bureau of Fiscal Services (BFS). This central payment system controls vital funding that millions of Americans depend on, including Social Security payments, veterans benefits, Medicare and Medicaid payments, and more. The payment system also controls billions of dollars that states rely on to support essential services like law enforcement, public education, and infrastructure repairs.
Federal law limits access to BFS to a select group of career civil servants with the appropriate security clearances. The complaint filed today in the Southern District of New York seeks to prevent Elon Musk and other unauthorized political appointees from accessing a system that could permit them to freeze federal funds with the click of a button, in violation of the Constitution and applicable law.
With this lawsuit, the coalition is seeking an injunction preventing the Trump administration from continuing its new policy of expanded access to BFS’s payment system and a declaration that the granting of access to DOGE is unlawful.
The attorneys general of Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Vermont, and Wisconsin are joining Attorney General Neronha in filing the lawsuit.