The Department of Education terminated several grants. The recipients challenged the terminations in federal district court. The district court issued a temporary restraining order, enjoining the terminations. The district court found the terminations likely violated the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). The government asked the U.S. Supreme Court to vacate the TRO. In a recently issued decision, the Supreme Court sided with the government and stayed the TRO. The Supreme Court held that the district court likely lacked jurisdiction under the APA because the APA’s waiver of government immunity does not extend to a suit to enforce “a contractual obligation to pay money.” Instead, the court opined that the suit should have been brought under the Tucker Act in the Court of Federal Claims.
Reforming the Federal Contracts and Grants System
Trending Now
SBA Orders All 8(a) Participants to Provide Financial Records • Department of Transportation – Rescinding Requirements Regarding Federal-Aid Contracts for Appalachian Contracts • Acquisition Reform vs. Congress: Who Will Win? • FAR 2.0 Update: Part 15 – Contracting By Negotiation • From DAS to WAS: Secretary Hegseth’s Acquisition Overhaul and What It Means for Industry
Supreme Court Says Suits Challenging Terminated Grants Should Be Filed in the COFC
Track federal procurement transformation with daily updates on DOGE, agency reform, and policy changes with our Transforming Procurement newsletter, delivering up-to-the-minute intelligence Monday–Saturday — Subscribe here.
