New Bill Gives AG Power to Cut All Federal Funding to 'Lawless Cities,' Potentially Hitting Local Services

The “Lawless Cities Accountability Act of 2025” is straightforward: it gives the Attorney General (AG) the power to immediately cut off all federal funding to any city or state they unilaterally deem a “lawless jurisdiction.” This isn’t a small tweak to a grant program; this is a nuclear option that instantly stops the flow of federal dollars to local governments, potentially impacting everything from road repair to school lunches. The AG must make these designations public within 30 days of the law passing, and then every three months after that, complete with an explanation for why each jurisdiction made the list (SEC. 2).

The 'Lawless' Criteria: A Vague Definition

So, what exactly triggers this funding cutoff? Section 3 defines a “lawless jurisdiction” using three broad criteria. First, if the area “actively stops its own police from stepping in to restore order” during widespread violence. Second, if the area restricts law enforcement access to places where officers have a legal right to be. Third, if the jurisdiction actively cuts funding or takes power away from its police agencies, or if it refuses federal help when it’s dealing with major, ongoing violence that it can’t control.

Notice the language here: terms like “actively stops” and “major, ongoing violence” are vague. This gives the AG significant room to interpret local policy decisions—like tactical withdrawals or budget reallocations—as grounds for financial punishment. For instance, if a city council decides to shift a small percentage of the police budget to mental health services, the AG could potentially label that an “active cut” and trigger the loss of all federal aid, regardless of the local context.

The Real-World Cost of the Funding Freeze

When a jurisdiction is designated “lawless,” the financial impact is immediate and severe. Federal funding isn’t just for big projects; it supports essential services that people rely on every day. Think about your local public transit system, community health clinics, housing assistance programs, or supplemental education funds—all of that money vanishes instantly. If you’re a resident of a designated city, you might suddenly see road projects stall, your local library cut hours, or your kid’s school lose critical resources.

And here’s the kicker: even if the city government immediately reverses the policy the AG objected to, the funds don’t flow back right away. Section 2 mandates a minimum 180-day waiting period after the initial designation before the AG can even consider removing the “lawless” label. That’s six months of operating without federal aid, which could financially cripple a local government and force massive service cuts that directly affect the working people and families who live there. This mandatory waiting period acts as a punitive measure against the entire population, not just the local politicians.

Concentrated Power and Political Risk

The most significant element of this bill is the massive power it concentrates in the hands of one person: the Attorney General. The AG is granted unilateral authority to make a determination that results in immediate, catastrophic financial consequences for millions of people, without any judicial review or clear, objective metrics. Given the political nature of the AG’s office, this creates a high risk that the designation process could be used as political leverage against states or cities run by opposing parties. Policy disagreements over police budgets or crowd control tactics could be weaponized to strip away crucial federal resources, potentially punishing an entire state’s population over a local political dispute. This bill essentially transforms the AG into a federal funding gatekeeper with the power to veto local governance choices under the threat of economic collapse.