The White House is calling on Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate whether federal grant funds are being unlawfully used to support lobbying or partisan political activity. President Donald Trump issued a presidential memorandum late last month, asking Bondi to report back within 180 days.
This directive is part of a broader initiative to safeguard taxpayer dollars and enforce accountability in federal grantmaking, prompted by administration concerns that funding has been steered toward grants with “highly political overtones.” Among the examples cited are a National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant adapting a teen-pregnancy prevention program for “transgender boys” and a National Science Foundation (NSF) award to advance racial justice in elementary mathematics, according to the order.
Under the Byrd Amendment (31 U.S.C. § 1352), recipients of federal grants—or contracts, loans or cooperative agreements—are barred from using taxpayer-appropriated funds to lobby or attempt to influence federal officials or lawmakers. Violations can result in civil penalties between $10,000 and $100,000 per incident, along with possible loss of funding or suspension from future federal awards.
The memorandum makes clear that it does not diminish the authority of executive departments or the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and that its implementation must comply with existing law and available appropriations.
Bondi will conduct her investigation in consultation with executive department heads and give a report within 180 days. Her report must be published in the Federal Register.
This directive reflects the administration’s ongoing effort to rein in waste and reduce what it views as ideological spending in federal programs. The memorandum could lead to significant changes in how federal agencies design, oversee and justify grant-funded projects. It may increase scrutiny of research and social programs that are perceived to have political agendas.
Critics argue that this directive might spark debates over academic freedom and the independence of policymaking. Concerns have been raised that program content choices, especially on sensitive social issues, could be viewed through a political lens rather than an administrative one.
Photo by Aaron Kittredge from Pexels
