- Oct 17, 2011
- 44,903
- 47,837
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Legal Union (Other)
Part of the Trump administration's energy policy involves energy grants to individual U.S. states. And according to the Washington Post, government lawyers admitted, in a December 15 court filing, that the decision to cut energy grants was based on partisanship.
Post reporters Meryl Kornfield and Hannah Natanson, in an article published on December 17, explain, "The Trump Administration acknowledged, in a court filing this week, that a decision to cut energy grants during the government shutdown was influenced by whether the money would go to a state that tended to elect Democrats statewide or nationally. Government lawyers also wrote in the filing that 'consideration of partisan politics is constitutionally permissible, including because it can serve as a proxy for legitimate policy considerations.'"
The "remarkably candid admission" in the filing, according to Kornfield and Natanson, "echoes" Trump's "frequent vows to punish cities and states that he sees as his enemies, from withholding disaster relief for Southern California to targeting blue cities with National Guard troops."
If we want to split hairs, I guess the Administration is not 'admitting' the fact, but it is not contesting the fact. And the footnote definitely has a whiff of "yeah, we did it, and there's nothing wrong with it."
Post reporters Meryl Kornfield and Hannah Natanson, in an article published on December 17, explain, "The Trump Administration acknowledged, in a court filing this week, that a decision to cut energy grants during the government shutdown was influenced by whether the money would go to a state that tended to elect Democrats statewide or nationally. Government lawyers also wrote in the filing that 'consideration of partisan politics is constitutionally permissible, including because it can serve as a proxy for legitimate policy considerations.'"
The "remarkably candid admission" in the filing, according to Kornfield and Natanson, "echoes" Trump's "frequent vows to punish cities and states that he sees as his enemies, from withholding disaster relief for Southern California to targeting blue cities with National Guard troops."
If we want to split hairs, I guess the Administration is not 'admitting' the fact, but it is not contesting the fact. And the footnote definitely has a whiff of "yeah, we did it, and there's nothing wrong with it."
