AFSCME Challenges Unlawful Child Care Funding Freeze in Court Battle

Impact of Federal Aid Freeze on Child Care Services Sparks Legal Challenges

Child care services across five Democratic-led states face potential shutdowns and layoffs as the federal government threatens to withhold $10 billion in funding. This move, considered illegal by many, has prompted AFSCME and its partners to take legal action, seeking a preliminary injunction to prevent the funding freeze.

AFSCME's lawsuit is crucial despite a temporary halt by a federal judge in a separate case initiated by the affected states. The organization argues that the freeze is politically motivated and violates the First Amendment rights of residents in California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, and New York.

Janna Rodriguez, a child care provider in New York and member of CSEA, emphasized the broader implications of the funding freeze. "If my clients can no longer afford child care, they will have to make hard decisions about leaving the workforce, which in turn has cascading effects on their well-being, our community, and the country at large," she stated.

AFSCME, along with SEIU and the Main Street Alliance, contends that the administration is bypassing required legal procedures for such a funding halt. The plaintiffs, represented by Democracy Forward and in-house counsel, include several AFSCME affiliates like United Domestic Workers (UDW/AFSCME Local 3930), AFSCME Council 31, and AFSCME Council 57.

AFSCME President Lee Saunders expressed concern over the administration's actions, stating, "Child care providers ensure that parents can go to work and kids can thrive. These services form the backbone of our economy, but instead of strengthening them, this administration is cruelly and illegally targeting child care providers, children and working parents to settle a political score."

The freeze not only affects child care providers but also the families and government workers who rely on these subsidies. Courtney Benton, a public health care worker in Illinois, highlighted her personal predicament, saying, "I simply cannot afford both my mortgage and the full cost of preschool. The child care subsidy that I receive has enabled me to have a career, to contribute to my community by caring for others, and to maintain a home for my children."

Providers like Juana Cortez and Erika Prado in California fear closure without the aid, as many children in their programs are subsidized. Cortez noted, "Losing that subsidy would mean losing nearly my entire enrollment and being unable to cover expenses like rent, payroll, food, or utilities."

Benton further stressed the educational and developmental impact on children, especially those with special needs, stating that quality care is irreplaceable by family members.

For more details on the legal proceedings, read about the lawsuit, AFSCME v. HHS, here.