A federal judge agreed with the state that the Trump administration’s immigration law enforcement priorities do not outweigh Congressional funding for a federal grant program.
(CN) — A federal judge on Tuesday agreed with Washington state that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security overturned the rules when it cut off funding for a Federal Emergency Management Agency program that helps state and local governments provide housing and services to immigrants and asylum seekers released from DHS custody.
Senior U.S. District Judge Barbara Rothstein issued summary judgment to Washington for its claim that Homeland Security violated the Administrative Procedure Act when it cut funding that Congress had previously appropriated for the Housing and Services Program.
The judge, an appointee of Jimmy Carter, rejected the Trump administration’s argument that the lawsuit — related to the $4 million that FEMA had given the state in 2024 — was, in essence, a contract dispute over which she has no jurisdiction and should have been filed in the Court of Federal Claims.
“The question is whether Washington is asking this court to determine the right to money or to order the defendants to pay,” Rothstein wrote. “It doesn’t. Washington seeks to lift an allegedly illegal agency barrier that prevents it from participating in a congressionally funded program and submitting reimbursement requests for agency review.”
New York, Chicago and other cities and counties last year brought similar challenges to Homeland Security’s cancellation of a program that dates back to 2019 and was intended to provide funding to help non-federal entities pay for humanitarian assistance, including food, shelter and acute medical care items, for noncitizens released from DHS custody.
FEMA terminated the program under one of President Donald Trump’s executive orders issued on the first day of his second term titled “Protecting the American People Against Invasion.”
According to FEMA, funding non-federal entities to provide housing and other services to individuals released from DHS short-term detention facilities was inconsistent with current Homeland Security priorities because such individuals “often lack legal status and are in the United States illegally.”
However, Rothstein said the Homeland Security rationale contradicted the purpose for which Congress appropriated the funds.
“Congress chose to support housing and related activities of non-federal entities as a means of alleviating overcrowding at CBP facilities,” she said, referring to the US Customs and Border Protection agency. “Defendants may disagree with that policy choice, but they cannot seek a change in executive branch priorities to overturn Congress’s funding judgment.”
Moreover, the judge said, the decision to cut off funding was arbitrary and capricious insofar as Homeland Security provided no reasonable explanation why the same shelters and related services that Congress funded and that FEMA previously identified as serving the program’s statutory purpose suddenly ceased to serve those purposes.
The judge waived the decision to cut off funding only as far as Washington was concerned. It directed FEMA to consider state requests for reimbursement under the program, but did not direct the agency to approve or pay any specific reimbursement requests.
Representatives for the US Department of Justice, which is representing Homeland Security in the lawsuit, and Washington state representatives did not immediately respond to a request for comment after regular business hours.
Subscribe to our free newsletters
Our weekly newsletter Closing arguments provides the latest on ongoing trials, major litigation and decisions in courts around the US and the world, while monthly Under the lights feeds legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.
