DC Appeals Court Halts Disbursement of Biden EPA Climate Grants
In a significant legal development, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued a partial stay late Wednesday evening on District Judge Tanya Chutkan’s order that would have forced Citibank to disburse $20 billion in EPA grants to eight green nonprofit groups by Thursday.
The appellate panel—composed of Judges Nina Pillard (Obama appointee), Gregory Katsas, and Neomi Rao (both Trump appointees)—temporarily blocked the disbursement pending further court review, signaling that the legal battle over the controversial Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) is far from over.
Judge Chutkan’s Initial Ruling Challenged
Judge Chutkan, appointed by President Obama, had earlier ruled in favor of the nonprofits, granting an injunction against EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin’s move to cancel the grants. Her order required Citibank to release the frozen funds, totaling $20 billion, to the designated recipients by April 18.
Zeldin, citing newly revealed information and alleged misconduct within the EPA under the Biden administration, had previously ordered Citibank to freeze the funds pending further investigation.
Zeldin’s Clawback Effort and Undercover Revelations
EPA Chief Lee Zeldin, acting under President Trump’s second-term agenda to root out misappropriated funds, has taken a hard stance on what he refers to as a “slush fund.” The targeted grants—part of the GGRF—had been awarded to organizations such as the Coalition for Green Capital, Climate United Fund, and Power Forward Communities.
Zeldin’s actions followed the release of a Project Veritas video, in which EPA Advisor Brent Efron appeared to describe the hasty pre-inauguration disbursement of climate grants as an “insurance policy” against the incoming Trump administration.
“It’s like we’re on the Titanic and we’re throwing gold bars off the edge,” Efron was recorded saying. This video provided a political and legal springboard for Zeldin’s decision to reverse the grant awards and launch an internal audit.
Legal Questions Over Executive Authority
The D.C. Circuit Court’s decision to stay Judge Chutkan’s order does not yet resolve the broader constitutional and administrative law issues at play—namely, whether the EPA under Trump has the authority to unilaterally revoke funding already allocated during a previous administration.
Attorneys for the nonprofits argue that the funds were lawfully awarded and that any reversal represents executive overreach. Meanwhile, the Trump-aligned EPA asserts that fraud and improper political motives tainted the original grant process.
Political Implications and What Comes Next
This legal tug-of-war is shaping up to be a high-stakes test of executive power, fiscal oversight, and political accountability. Zeldin has pledged to fight all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary.
“It is my commitment to President Trump, Congress, and you, that EPA will be an exceptional steward of your tax dollars,” Zeldin said in a public statement. “I’ll have it no other way.”
While the temporary stay halts the immediate distribution of funds, it leaves the underlying legal challenge open. Oral arguments are expected in the coming weeks, which could determine the future of not only the $20 billion in grants, but also broader questions of administrative discretion in reversing prior appropriations.
The case continues to unfold at the intersection of environmental policy, administrative law, and post-election political reform—and all eyes are now on the D.C. Circuit.