An Indian-American federal judge has become the latest target of angry attacks from MAGA supporters after stopping a major move by the Trump administration. The judge blocked an effort to freeze billions of dollars in federal funding. The incident highlights a growing pattern in which judges of Indian origin face harsh and often xenophobic backlash when they block Trump-era policies.

On Friday, US District Judge Arun Subramanian of the Southern District of New York issued a temporary restraining order. The ruling halted the Trump administration’s plan to freeze nearly $10 billion in federal funds meant for child care and social services.

The freeze would have affected five Democratic-led states: California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, and New York.

States Challenge the Funding Halt

The order came after attorneys general from the five states filed a lawsuit. They argued that the Department of Health and Human Services had no legal authority to suspend the funds.

They also said the move interfered with Congress’s exclusive power over federal spending.

Judge Subramanian agreed that the states showed “good cause” for emergency relief. He cited a strong chance of success in court, the risk of serious harm to vulnerable families, and the public interest in keeping aid flowing.

Administration Cites Fraud Allegations

Earlier this week, the Trump administration announced the funding pause. Officials said they acted because of alleged large-scale fraud, especially in Minnesota’s child care subsidy programs.

Investigations there uncovered schemes in which Somali immigrant communities were accused of stealing millions of dollars.

President Donald Trump defended the freeze as part of his “America first” agenda. He claimed taxpayer money was being drained by “scams” and wasteful welfare programs.

Judge Limits Ruling to Emergency Relief

In his brief order, Judge Subramanian did not rule on the fraud claims themselves. Instead, he paused the funding freeze for 14 days to allow full legal arguments.

Legal experts said this approach is standard for temporary restraining orders. Such orders aim to prevent immediate harm, not decide the final outcome.

Subramanian also suggested that HHS may have ignored required timelines for distributing funds. That, he noted, could violate administrative law.

MAGA Backlash Turns Personal

Despite the narrow scope of the ruling, the reaction online was swift and aggressive.

On platforms such as X, critics labeled Subramanian a “Biden appointee” and a “DEI hire.” They suggested he was chosen for his ethnicity, not his qualifications.

The attacks soon became openly xenophobic. Some extremist posts called him an “anchor baby” and demanded his deportation to India, even though he is a US citizen.

Others accused him of “judicial insurrection” and claimed he was protecting “Somali scams.”

Senior Trump adviser Stephen Miller also criticized the ruling. He said it forces Americans to “fund infinite refugee daycare scams,” calling the decision anti-American.

Other Indian-American Judges Face Similar Attacks

Subramanian is not alone. Several other Indian-American judges have faced similar hostility in recent months.

Judge Amit Mehta of Washington, DC, became a frequent target after ruling last year that Trump’s “Stop the steal” speech before the January 6 Capitol riot could plausibly be seen as a “call to action.” He said it could form part of a civil conspiracy and was not protected by the first amendment.

Immigration Rulings Draw Fire

Judge Vince Chhabria of Northern California also faced MAGA anger. He blocked Immigration and Customs Enforcement from using Medicare and Medicaid data for deportation raids.

That decision triggered accusations that he was protecting undocumented immigrants at the expense of public safety.

Judge Indira Talwani in the Crosshairs

One of the most frequent targets has been Judge Indira Talwani of Massachusetts.

On Friday, she announced that she would issue a temporary restraining order blocking the administration’s plan to end family reunification parole programs. The move would affect an estimated 10,000 to 12,000 migrants from countries including Cuba, Haiti, Colombia, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras.

Talwani has repeatedly challenged Trump’s second-term agenda.

Previous Clashes With the Administration

Talwani has a history of rulings that anger conservatives. She earlier blocked attempts to end large parole programs for migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. Although the Supreme Court later allowed some revocations, her decisions made her a major target.

She also faced criticism over welfare-related cases. In October 2025, during a government shutdown, she ordered the administration to resume SNAP benefits for 42 million people.

In another ruling, she blocked parts of Trump’s “One big beautiful bill” that aimed to cut Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood affiliates.

Identity and Politics Collide

Together, these cases show how legal resistance to Trump-era policies has become deeply personal.

Judicial pushback now often intersects with identity-based attacks. As a result, Indian-American judges have found themselves at the center of an increasingly heated political and cultural battle in the United States.