Rep.SaludCarbajal
Representatives Salud Carbajal (D-CA-24), Julia Brownley (D-CA-26), and Jimmy Panetta (D-CA-19) sent a letter to Acting Administrator Stephen Ehikian of the General Services Administration over the planned illegal closures of crucial facilities across the Central Coast. The planned closures will impact U.S. Department of Interior (DOI), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and United States Forest Service (USFS) facilities in Ventura, Santa Barbara, and San Luis Obispo counties.
“These are critical agencies that help support our local economies’ vitality and the American way of life,” wrote the lawmakers. “Efforts to justify these closures as a measure to help better serve the American people is, at best, disingenuous.”
The full text of the letter is available here and below.
Dear Acting Administrator Ehikian:
As Representatives of the Central Coast, we write to demand that you halt planned facility closures at the U.S. Department of Interior (DOI), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the United States Forest Service (USFS) that would impact our constituents in Ventura, Santa Barbara, and San Luis Obispo counties. These are critical agencies that help support our local economies’ vitality and the American people. These indiscriminate closures, done in an arbitrary and capricious manner, are antithetical to our Constitution and values as Americans.
Trying to shutter the physical locations for these vital agencies is reflective of the illegal actions undertaken by DOGE to undermine the effectiveness of our government rather than working to improve it to better serve our constituents and the American people.
DOI was created by an act of Congress in 1849 and is critical in managing our nation’s cultural heritage— including our public lands, which have been a boon to our local recreational economies. In fact, California is home to the nation’s largest active outdoor industry economy, contributing $73.8 billion in economic spending annually. This is not by coincidence. California is also home to nine national parks—more than any other state. The Central Coast of California alone is home to the Channel Islands National Park and Pinnacles National Park. The positive contribution to our economies is reflected by the fact that in 2023, 36.2 million visitors to California’s national parks spent $3.2 billion, supporting 39,678 jobs.
Likewise, NOAA is essential to America’s innovation and economic vitality. Under the Department of Commerce, NOAA is tasked with the critical mission to provide daily weather forecasts, severe storm warnings, and support marine commerce. NOAA’s mission is carried out by some of our nation’s top scientists. The products and cutting-edge research generated by NOAA helps support more than one-third of America’s gross domestic product. Everyday Americans rely on NOAA’s science for basic day-to-day needs like determining the weather. This information is critical for commercial and public safety needs. It is NOAA’s data that helps provide the public with free and lifesaving alerts when Americans are facing natural disasters like hurricanes and wildfires.
Furthermore, with more than $59 billion in agricultural sales, California leads the nation as the top producer of agricultural products in the United States. Throughout the world, California was the world’s largest agriculture producer in 2022. Closing USDA offices only serves to harm American families and our farmers who rely on USDA to ensure food safety, manage our natural resources, and support our food supply chains and economic well-being.
Finally, the U.S. Forest Service manages 193 million acres of public lands and provides potentially life-saving expertise in fire management. Our constituents are no strangers to wildfires. Fires in the Western United States have only become larger, more destructive and deadly. We cannot pretend that this is not a reality that many Americans are experiencing.
Efforts to justify these closures as a measure to help better serve the American people is, at best, disingenuous. As outlined above, these agencies are critical to our nations and region’s wellbeing and help maintain our economic vitality to support our way of life. Again, we demand that you cease these office closures. Further we ask that you let us know under what authority are you acting to close these offices without, at the very least, consultation with Congress—a co-equal branch of government.
Thank you, Congressman Carbajal.
Salud, as usual, looking out for ALL his constituents like a real Congressperson. We’re lucky to have him.
Shutting these agencies will do a lot more than putting Californians out of work, it will make us less safe as a society. Sanity and reason must prevail if we’re going to make through the next 4 years without destroying this nation any further.
Nope, not just a LAWSO major, much more than that, “Doc.”
“means absolutely nothing in court.” – BWAHAHA! This is a letter, not a trial brief. Just stop man. You’re sounding ridiculous.
If the cutbacks are truly illegal as the title states, I’m guessing the courts will be getting involved soon, but no evidence for illegality is presented here from Carbajal et al.
BASIC – “but no evidence for illegality is presented here from Carbajal et al.”
It is if you actually read the article and the short letter. Jesus, dude….
Oh I read them. Hey, you’re so sure I’m wrong – why don’t you pull a quote out of this article and/or letter that supports your statement – ie, illegality. We’re not talking “unfair”, “unjustified”, or “capricious” either. Legality, Jesus dude.
BASIC – yes, of course you are wrong. When aren’t you?
His basis for the alleged illegality rests in the widely maintained (and often court upheld) theory that DOGE is acting unconstitutionally in it’s shutting down of Congressionally created offices and departments. Here’s the quote that you couldn’t understand: “reflective of the illegal actions undertaken by DOGE[.]”
Reading things more critically is a great first step to not sounding clueless.
Why does Basic need people to explain everything to him? He can just google. Oh, I know why.
In short, many of Doge’s actions are likely illegal. Many of the Trump admin’s attempts to gut or destroy congressionally controlled agencies–illegal. Many of their mass firings have already been reversed by the courts. Their illegal freezes ion contractually obligated Federal funding also reversed.
Does that mean that closing individual offices is illegal? Maybe not.
Does Basic even care enough to find out the…basics. Nope. He’s just a troll stuck in a dead end job giving advice to people that he can’t stand. Poor Basic.
Why? Because he’s just not very smart. Proven time and again.
Basic, as always, you fail to respond to the substance of my comment. Go back. Re-read it. Understand it. Respond intelligently. Or don’t–that’s your SOP.
Where in Salud’s letter or Edhats article are any claims of illegality to justify the title? Nowhere. My comments are very straightforward. You and Sac got instantly triggered, off-topic with your usual personal bs, and sidetracked. Nothing complex here. If you’re still pissed about the election just say it.
Nope, nothing complex, just you over reacting as usual. It’s not that complicated, Trump
Admin breaking the law in regards to executive action in areas where the executive branch has no oversight. Relax, you’ll be okay.
Basic is correct, this letter does not cite an illegal act. The majority of of the letter just makes an argument for why they think the closures should not happen.
“Trying to shutter the physical locations of these vital agencies “reflects” the pattern of illegal actions allegedly taken by DOGE”—but reflection is not the same as being illegal in itself.
Your argument assumes that if DOGE has previously made unlawful cuts or closures, then this current action must also be illegal, which doesn’t necessarily follow.
So, saying it “reflects” a pattern doesn’t automatically make it unlawful—it highlights a potential issue but doesn’t prove wrongdoing on its own.
Too bad you don’t understand English, nor legalese.
So…? Law and Society major at UCSB? Wannabe pre-law stuff? But hey, anyways, where’s the statement of any form of illegality you claimed? And “reflects the illegality of…” (other, unrelated actions) means absolutely nothing in court. “Reflects”?? Huh.
Holy moly! BI is a lawyer, too!
His armchair is truly multifunctional, like some sort of Swiss Army posterior injector of expertise!
Sacjon: Maybe consider for a moment that you are being played over and over and over again. The biggest joy in Basic’s day is getting you to take the bait each and e-v-e-r-y time. Sure “he” gets deleted quite a bit, but not after laughing at once again catching the same fish ten to twenty times a day. Getting drubbed by one person is a bit disturbing. I’ve thought more than once that you and Basic are one in the same.
So, Bends Knees, you agree that BI posts nonsense.
Didn’t think you would have been able to discern that.
Anon: For sure, definitely a lot of nonsense. The key is to recognize the nonsense, but more importantly, not getting “sucked in.” Completely getting sucked in multiple times a day for years on end only shows emotional immaturity and lack of self control. One loses the “argument” when childish personal attacks enter the picture. For example, purposely misspelling a commenter’s alias (BasicIdiot/Doc/Captain/Sack/SadSac/WrongJon/etc.) is a indication of defeat. Kind of like the schoolyard bully, who usually aren’t so bright, resort to physical/mental attacks. If you wnat to hate and bully, please keep it out of the EH comments board.
BEES – “WrongJon” is a new one! I’ve never seen that. Who called me that? Kinda funny!
“Kind of like the schoolyard bully, who usually aren’t so bright,” – LOL now that’s hilarious. You, the one who REPEATEDLY says the “majority” of Americans voted for Trump, are calling me not so bright. That’s rich, BEES!
Sorry, but just because you’re usually wrong and get called out for your constant hypocrisy doesn’t mean others aren’t smart.
Your self awareness is severely lacking.
I agree with you Basic. You are a voice of reason here!
HAMMONDS – You do realize though, that he’s wrong, right? Like objectively wrong? DOGE closing government offices like this has been found by courts to be illegal. That is what Salud is saying, pretty darn clearly.
Well, I guess pudding is contagious….
ANONNOBETTER – “Basic is correct, this letter does not cite an illegal act. ”
No. The letter clearly states the basis for the alleged illegal act – DOGE closing government offices is allegedly unconstitutional in this case. THAT IS THE ALLEGED ILLEGAL ACT.
Look guys, just because you don’t agree with something doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
“Your argument assumes that if DOGE has previously made unlawful cuts or closures, then this current action must also be illegal, which doesn’t necessarily follow.” – It absolutely does. This is like BASIC’s ridiculous statement that DOGE closing down government offices is “UNRELATED” to DOGE closing down government offices
There are plenty of court cases on this very theory and many judges have held DOGE is acting outside of the law. THAT IS THE ALLEGATION HERE. Full stop.
You guys can play lawyer all day, but clearly neither of you are and it doesn’t make your claim true. More importantly, this is just a letter, not a pleading that would require a more developed statement of the legal theory.
Done with this nonsense now.
Allegedly? Now you’re just adding your own content to the letter. I don’t see that word anywhere in the letter or the article.
An illegal act is a definitive action that violates a law, while an alleged illegal act is a claim that an action is illegal but hasn’t been proven in a court of law. An illegal act is a proven violation, while an alleged illegal act is a suspected violation pending legal determination.
You state, “More importantly, this is just a letter.” Yes — and that is the focus of the article and discussion. The title claims “its Illegal Plans to Close Facilities,” and the letter says these vital agencies “reflect” a pattern of illegal actions—but nowhere does it specify which laws are being violated. Again, Basic is correct.
“Many judges have held that DOGE is acting outside the law.” How many, exactly? A majority? A thousand? And some disagree. None of that ultimately matters. Consensus on whether an act is constitutional rests with the Supreme Court. (And even they get it wrong sometimes.)
INO – yes, at this point, before it is determined by a jury to be fact, it is ALLEGED. Saying that word does nothing here as it is implied by common sense.
LOL dude….. you’re not a lawyer, it’s clear. Leave the legal analysis to the pros.
Oh, and once again, it’s a letter, not a trial brief so you “demands” are absolutely irrelevant.
Give it a rest now. You’re just making things up.
You stated, “…at this point, before it is determined by a jury to be fact, it is ALLEGED.”
And the same could be said in reverse: before it is determined by a jury not to be fact, it is also alleged.
But let’s be clear–juries don’t determine whether something is factually illegal.
Nor do they decide whether a law or act is constitutional–that responsibility lies with the courts.
Remember, Basic’s argument was: “No evidence for illegality is presented here from Carbajal et al.” And that’s true. Maybe the action will ultimately be found illegal, or maybe not. Either way, the letter did not cite any specific illegal act.
Apparently, common sense isn’t all that common.
Common sense is absent from every comment you make.
Why are you asking questions that you are perfectly able to answer? You want to know about the legal rulings over the last two months regarding the Executive Branch taking actions outside of their constitutional limitations? You want to know how many judges have frozen or reversed these unconstitutional, i.e., “illegal” actions?
Just google it dude.
Beyond that, Carbajal’s letter at no point states that the closures are illegal. That’s language in the headline on the news story, not in the letter, so you can relax about that.
Lastly, the letter does in fact state that these closures are “reflective of illegal actions taken by DOGE.”
This is absolutely correct. Doge has repeatedly been slapped down for a variety of actions which judges consider to be illegal or outside of executive action. The President does not have the power of the budget. The Supreme Court may well overturn the Impound Control Act of 1974, but currently it is the law of the land. Trump’s plethora of Press Releases, oh, uh, I mean Executive Actions do not give him the power of the Congress.
There’s a reason for that. You may want a King or a Dictator in the Oval Office, but our nation rejected that model a long time ago.
Yeah Alex, why don’t you just tell Sac you just reiterated what I stated in the the first place, which triggered his massive rant to try and go against my very statement. What a waste of time.
I can’t keep up with your blizzard of daily posts. Also, so you’re not actually a doctor are you?
No worries. Yes I am.
ALEX – not to nitpick, but the letter does allege illegality:
“These indiscriminate closures, done in an arbitrary and capricious manner, are antithetical to our Constitution and values as Americans.”
Again though, this isn’t a trial brief and no “evidence” need be provided at this point. The allegation of illegal action – DOGE engaging in unconstitutional acts while closing government offices – is stated and even if it weren’t, this is again just a letter.
So you’re mostly correct in your comment, but I just wanted to point that out as, as you can see, the simpletons will take that as some vindication of their scrambled and incoherent complaints.
Reread the article. Could not find where they promised to stop illegally restricting second amendment rights.
Um, probably because nobody is.
SAIL – you gotta watch the boom on those tacks…..
What article do you think you’re commenting on?
This is a PRIME example of why no real attempt to streamline the state or national government and aggressively go after fraud, waste, and abuse has ever occurred. President Obama recognized the issue. He tried to work on it. Nothing. Everybody wants to attack waste, fraud, abuse, and the bloat in our National, State, and Local governments. However, no United States Senator or United States House Representative or State Official want any thinning in their district or state or national! Just somebody else’s!!!
Yep, and meanwhile government spending has skyrocketed to the point where our national debt is completely out of control and several times a year we have to revisit the ongoing “raise the debt ceiling or the government will shutdown” deal. It’s absurd.
It’s absurd – and it’s an established rethuglican policy. Cut taxes on the rich to reduce revenue, but expand spending.
The current crew is reducing spending, dude. You must have noticed.
Oh, they’ll reduce spending for education, and medical and science research, but overall spending will increase. Just watch – history repeats, you know.
Amazing that no such fictional level of government fraud is being found, then, isn’t it?
“ illegal closures”
Are they illegal? Let the courts decide.