The TOI correspondent from Washington: An Indian-American federal judge has become the latest target of vitriolic attacks from MAGA supporters after blocking a key Trump administration move to freeze billions of dollars in federal funding, underscoring a broader pattern in which judges of Indian origin have faced intense — and often xenophobic — backlash for rulings that stall Trump policies.Federal judge Arun Subramanian of the Southern District of New York on Friday issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) halting the Trump administration’s decision to freeze nearly $10 billion in federal funding for child care and social services in five Democratic-led states. The order followed a lawsuit brought by attorneys general from California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota and New York, who argued that the department of health and human services (HHS) had no legal basis to suspend the funds and had intruded on Congress’s exclusive authority over federal spending.
The funding pause, announced earlier this week, was justified by the administration as a response to alleged large-scale fraud, particularly in Minnesota’s child care subsidy programs, where investigations have revealed schemes involving Somali immigrant communities siphoning off millions of dollars. President Trump framed the freeze as part of his “America first” agenda, saying taxpayer money was being drained by “scams” and wasteful welfare spending.In his brief order, judge Subramaniam said the states had shown “good cause” for emergency relief, citing a likelihood of success on the merits, the risk of irreparable harm to vulnerable families, and the public interest in maintaining the flow of aid. While the ruling did not weigh in on the fraud allegations themselves, it imposed a 14-day pause on the freeze to allow for fuller legal arguments. Legal experts noted that such reasoning is standard for TROs, which are designed to prevent immediate harm rather than decide the underlying dispute. Subramaniam also indicated that HHS may have bypassed statutory timelines for distributing funds, potentially violating administrative law.The decision was enough to ignite a fierce MAGA backlash online. On platforms such as X, critics branded Subramaniam a “Biden appointee” and a “DEI hire,” implying he was chosen for his ethnicity rather than merit. The attacks quickly veered into overt xenophobia, with extremist posts calling him an “anchor baby” and urging his deportation to India despite his US citizenship. Others accused him of “judicial insurrection” and of shielding “Somali scams.” Stephen Miller, a senior Trump adviser, complained that the ruling forces Americans to “fund infinite refugee daycare scams,” portraying it as anti-American.Subramaniam is not alone. At least three other Indian-American judges have faced similar fury from MAGA circles in recent months. Judge Amit Mehta of Washington, DC, drew sustained attacks after ruling last year that Trump’s “Stop the steal” speech before the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot could plausibly be viewed as a “call to action” and part of a civil conspiracy, and therefore not protected by the first amendment. Judge Vince Chhabria of the Northern District of California also became a target after blocking the use of Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services data by Immigration and Customs Enforcement for deportation raids.Among the most frequent MAGA targets is Massachusetts-based Judge Indira Talwani, who has repeatedly halted elements of Trump’s second-term agenda. On Friday, she announced during a hearing that she would issue a TRO blocking the administration’s plan to terminate family reunification parole programs affecting an estimated 10,000 to 12,000 migrants from countries including Cuba, Haiti, Colombia, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras.Talwani has clashed with the administration before. She previously blocked efforts to end large-scale parole programs for migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela, although the Supreme Court later allowed some revocations to proceed. She has also drawn criticism for welfare-related rulings, including an October 2025 order during a government shutdown directing the administration to resume SNAP benefits for 42 million people, and for blocking provisions in Trump’s “One big beautiful bill” that cut Medicaid funding to planned parenthood affiliates.Together, the episodes highlight how judicial pushback to Trump-era policies has increasingly intersected with identity-based attacks, placing Indian-American judges at the center of a charged political and cultural battle.
