BALTIMORE — Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown is continuing his relentless pursuit of legal action against President Donald Trump's executive agenda.
On Monday Brown joined yet another lawsuit, this time targeting the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) accusing them of "unlawfully cutting funds" for health research at universities around the country.
Brown claims Trump is violating previous funding agreements approved by Congress.
The multi-state lawsuitcomes after NIH announced last week its intention to slash indirect cost rates to 15 percent.
These cost rates mostly entail federal reimbursement for expenses incurred by institutions conducting research.
Brown and 21 other Democratic Attorneys General argue universities were left with no time to adjust their budgets.
According to the lawsuit, which was filed in Massachusetts, the University of Maryland at Baltimore (UMB) receives $245 million annually in direct NIH funding, with an additional $75 million in pass through money.
If Trump's rate cut were to take effect, UMB would reportedly stand to lose $49.5 million per year.
“Maryland’s research institutions have pioneered treatments that have saved countless lives, but they can't do this vital work without proper funding,” said Brown. “This decision not only jeopardizes Maryland jobs and our state's position as a global leader in medical research, but it also delays or denies potentially lifesaving discoveries that could help our loved ones.”
AG Brown speaks on Maryland's fight against Trump's executive orders
Just three weeks into his Presidency, Trump has faced a barrage of lawsuits. At every turn, Brown has been among nearly two dozen or so Democratic Attorney Generals seeking to stymie the duly elected President's progress in fulfilling campaign pledges.
Thus far Brown and company have carefully filed lawsuits in more favorable courts and states, resulting in federal district level judges issuing temporary restraining orders.
“The chaos and uncertainty of the first three weeks of the Trump Administration has threatened the jobs of tens of thousands of Maryland federal employees, struck fear into the hearts of the members of our most vulnerable and marginalized communities, threatened our economic strength and now, placed at risk federal resources that Marylanders rely on every single day to pay for food, health care, and housing costs,” said Brown. “Our Office is doing everything we can to protect all Marylanders and will defend against future unlawful federal actions.”
This includes stalling a directive enabling billionaire Elon Musk and his newly formed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) access to Department of Treasury data, and Trump's attempts to freeze state grants, as well as ending birthright citizenship.
Recent rulings from the bench have raised separation of powers concerns among some attorneys.
Vice President JD Vance, who is a Yale educated lawyer, shared his opinion on X.
"If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal," Vance posted on Musk's social platform. "If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that's also illegal. Judges aren't allowed to control the executive's legitimate power."
Those views were echoed by current Republican Senator, and fellow lawyer, Tom Cotton, and Harvard Law professor Adrian Vermuele.
Judicial interference with legitimate acts of state, especially the internal functioning of a co-equal branch, is a violation of the separation of powers. https://t.co/dxZoPSXU9s
— Adrian Vermeule (@Vermeullarmine) February 8, 2025
Some court critics, including Musk, hinted that Trump could outright defy the courts.
MORE: Vance and Musk openly question the authority of the courts as Trump's agenda faces legal pushback
While calling the rulings "crazy" and standing by his actions, Trump did not indicate whether he plans to follow judges orders.
For now it appears the administration is trying to go through the legal appeals process.
In response to a federal judge in New York's order banning Musk's DOGE from treasury records, the Justice Department wrote "no court can issue an injunction that directly severs the clear line of supervision Article II requires. Because the order on its face draws an impermissible and anti-constitutional distinction, it should be dissolved immediately."
It's unclear how long lived these pauses will last, as the U.S. Supreme Court's conservative majority last year granted sitting Presidents sweeping immunity while carrying out official actions in office.
