The TOI correspondent from Washington: An Indian-American federal judge has become the latest target of fierce attacks from MAGA supporters after he blocked a key move by the Trump administration to freeze billions of dollars in federal funding. This underscores a broader pattern in which judges of Indian origin have faced intense — and often xenophobic — backlash for rulings that obstruct Trump policies.Federal Judge Arun Subramanian of the Southern District of New York issued a preliminary injunction (TRO) on Friday reversing 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 from 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 for suspending the funding and had interfered with Congress’s exclusive authority over federal spending.The funding pause announced earlier this week was justified by the administration in response to alleged large-scale fraud, particularly in child care subsidy programs in Minnesota, where investigations have found schemes involving Somali immigrant communities siphon millions of dollars. President Trump called the freeze part of his “America First” agenda and said taxpayer money was being wasted on “fraud” and wasteful social spending.In his brief order, Justice Subramaniam said the states had demonstrated a “good case” for emergency relief, citing the prospect 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 address the fraud allegations themselves, it did impose a 14-day stay on the freeze to allow for more detailed legal arguments. Legal experts noted that such justification is standard for TROs, which are intended to prevent immediate harm rather than resolve the underlying dispute. Subramaniam also suggested that HHS may have circumvented legal deadlines for distributing funds, potentially violating administrative law.The decision was enough to spark a fierce MAGA backlash online. On platforms like The attacks quickly devolved into blatant xenophobia. Extremist posts called him an “anchor baby” and called for his deportation to India despite his U.S. citizenship. Others accused him of a “judicial insurrection” and shielding “Somali scams.”“Stephen Miller, a senior Trump adviser, complained that the ruling forced Americans to “fund countless refugee daycare scams” and portrayed it as anti-American.Subramaniam is not alone. At least three other Indian-American judges have faced similar anger from MAGA circles in recent months. Judge Amit Mehta of Washington, D.C., drew sustained attacks after he ruled last year that Trump’s “Stop the Steal” speech before the Capitol insurrection on January 6, 2021 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 he blocked Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s use of Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services data in deportation raids.Among the most common 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 to block the administration’s plan to end family reunification parole programs that affect 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 government before. It 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 criticized welfare-related rulings, including an October 2025 order during a government shutdown directing the government to restore SNAP benefits to 42 million people and for blocking provisions in Trump’s “one big beautiful bill” that cut Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood.Together, the episodes show how judicial resistance to Trump-era policies increasingly intersects with identity-based attacks, placing Indian-American judges at the center of a heated political and cultural battle.
