FEMA Lawsuits: BRIC, Grant Conditions, and Workforce Cuts

Since early 2025, FEMA lawsuits filed by state attorneys general, local governments, and federal employee unions have challenged the Trump administration’s decisions to terminate the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program, attach immigration and diversity conditions to emergency grants, shorten grant performance periods, and shrink FEMA’s workforce. Federal judges have issued injunctions in most of these cases, forcing FEMA to restore billions in canceled funding and blocking the challenged grant conditions, while an appeal and a pending workforce case continue into 2026.

The BRIC Program Termination Case

The biggest ruling to date came in Washington v. FEMA, filed in July 2025 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts by 20 states led by New York Attorney General Letitia James and Washington Attorney General Nick Brown.¹ FEMA had announced in April 2025 that it was terminating the BRIC program, a pre-disaster mitigation initiative, calling it “wasteful” and “politicized.” The states argued the cancellation threatened up to 2,000 approved projects and amounted to the executive branch impounding funds Congress had appropriated.²

U.S. District Judge Richard G. Stearns granted a preliminary injunction on August 5, 2025, blocking reallocation of more than $4 billion in BRIC funds.³ On December 11, 2025, he ordered the administration to restore the full canceled scope: $3.6 billion in awards already made but not yet paid, plus $882 million in planned grants FEMA had not intended to award.⁴ Judge Stearns called the termination an “unlawful Executive encroachment on the prerogative of Congress to appropriate funds for a specific and compelling purpose,” finding it violated federal law limiting reductions to FEMA’s core functions, appropriations law, the Stafford Act, and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.⁵

Compliance Fight

FEMA did not promptly follow the December order. In March 2026 the court issued an enforcement order after the agency failed to reinstate the program.⁶⁷⁸⁹ Previous applicants had to resubmit from scratch under tighter timelines and a “shovel-ready” limitation.¹⁰

Immigration Conditions on Emergency Grants

In spring 2025, DHS began requiring states and localities receiving FEMA grants to comply with federal immigration enforcement priorities or lose funding. Twenty state attorneys general filed State of Illinois v. Federal Emergency Management Agency on May 13, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island.¹¹

Senior Judge William E. Smith granted summary judgment for the states on September 24, 2025. He found the immigration conditions violated the Administrative Procedure Act because DHS gave no factual basis for the policy and ignored states’ reliance interests, and violated the Spending Clause because the conditions bore no reasonable relationship to the grants’ purposes and were unlawfully ambiguous. He permanently enjoined the conditions across 40 DHS grant programs.¹¹¹² The government filed a notice of appeal on November 21, 2025, and the case was pending before the First Circuit as of early 2026.

In a related case, Illinois v. Noem, Judge Mary McElroy in the same district issued a temporary restraining order on September 30, 2025, blocking FEMA from reallocating roughly $233 million in Homeland Security Grant Program funds away from sanctuary jurisdictions. That order was converted into a preliminary injunction on October 24, 2025.¹²¹³

New Conditions on EMPG and HSGP Funding

FEMA imposed two other conditions in 2025 on the Emergency Management Performance Grant and Homeland Security Grant Program, which fund state and local emergency management operations. It placed a hold on EMPG grants until states certified their population figures excluded people removed under federal immigration law, a calculation states said they could not perform because no reliable data supported it.¹⁴ FEMA also cut the performance period on both grants from three years to one, which states argued made multi-year projects impossible to complete.¹⁵

A coalition of 12 states led by Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel filed State of Michigan v. Noem on November 4, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon.¹⁴ Magistrate Judge Amy E. Potter granted summary judgment and entered permanent injunctive relief on December 23, 2025.¹⁶ The court found the population certification hold exceeded FEMA’s authority and that the performance-period cut was arbitrary and capricious because FEMA “disregarded the states’ reliance interests and did not explain the change.”¹⁷ The order vacated both conditions, restored three-year performance periods, and required normal disbursement to resume.¹⁸

North Carolina recovered $17 million supporting about 100 state emergency workers and personnel in 100 local jurisdictions, including the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians.¹⁹ Maryland stood to recover more than $18 million.¹⁷

Local Governments Challenge DEI and Immigration Conditions

Twenty-nine local governments led by Santa Clara County and San Francisco filed County of Santa Clara v. Noem on October 1, 2025, in the Northern District of California. They challenged conditions attached to more than $350 million in emergency preparedness grants that required cooperation with federal immigration enforcement and the abandonment of diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. The affected funds supported first responders and preparations for Super Bowl LX and the 2026 FIFA World Cup.²⁰

U.S. District Judge William H. Orrick granted a preliminary injunction on November 21, 2025, finding the plaintiffs likely to succeed on Spending Clause and APA claims and that losing emergency funding constituted irreparable harm. The case remained ongoing as of mid-2026.²¹

Union Suit Over FEMA Workforce Cuts

In December 2025, DHS moved to shrink FEMA’s staffing, with plans to cut 10,000 positions by not renewing the terms of employees hired under the Stafford Act as those terms expired. According to Roll Call, the broader objective was to dismantle FEMA in favor of delivering disaster relief funding directly to states.²²

On January 27, 2026, three unions — AFGE, AFSCME, and SEIU — and six local governments (San Francisco, Santa Clara County, Chicago, Baltimore, Harris County, and King County) filed a supplemental complaint in their existing lawsuit, AFGE v. Trump, before Judge Susan Illston in the Northern District of California.²³²⁴ They argued the cuts violated congressional protections meant to preserve FEMA’s independence and would leave the agency unable to respond to emergencies.²⁵

GAO’s Impoundment Finding

Outside the courts, the Government Accountability Office issued a formal decision in September 2025 finding that FEMA violated the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 by withholding funds Congress had appropriated for the Emergency Food and Shelter Program, the Shelter and Services Program, and Next Generation Warning System grants. The GAO cited financial holds, deobligations, and withdrawals of already-disbursed money as illegal impoundment.²⁶ A DHS spokesperson called the decision “simply incorrect” and “nitpicking a technicality.”²⁷ The GAO noted DHS and FEMA had failed to respond to multiple requests for information during the review.

Where FEMA Won: The CPB Case

Not every challenge to FEMA’s funding decisions has succeeded. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting sued after FEMA froze more than $38 million in Next Generation Warning System funds it had been distributing to public broadcasting stations. U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly in Washington, D.C. denied a temporary restraining order in March 2025 and denied a preliminary injunction on July 15, 2025, finding that FEMA had briefly reopened its payment portal and CPB could not show irreparable harm.²⁸ By August 2025, FEMA had bypassed CPB entirely, limiting the next $40 million round of NGWS applicants to states and tribal nations.²⁹ The case was stayed in late 2025 and terminated in April 2026.³⁰

1
Office of the New York State Attorney General. Attorney General James Sues FEMA for Cutting Bipartisan Funding for Natural Disasters
2
Courthouse News Service. 20 States Sue Trump Administration for Pulling $4.5 Billion From FEMA Disaster Prevention
3
PBS NewsHour. Trump Administration Cannot Reallocate Billions Meant for Disaster Mitigation, Federal Judge Rules
4
WSLS. Federal Judge Orders FEMA to Restore Billions in Canceled Disaster Mitigation Funding
5
Office of the New York State Attorney General. Washington v. FEMA Summary Judgment Decision
6
Oregon Department of Justice. FEMA Disaster Mitigation Grants – Washington v. FEMA
7
NC Department of Justice. Attorney General Jeff Jackson Asks Court to Enforce Order Requiring FEMA to Reinstate NC’s $200 Million Infrastructure Program
8
NC Department of Justice. FEMA Concedes in BRIC Funding Case, Files Plan to Reinstate Water, Sewer, and Flood Protection Program
9
FEMA. FEMA Announces $1 Billion in Federal Funding to Help States Mitigate Impact
10
National Low Income Housing Coalition. FEMA Reinstates Massive Disaster Mitigation Program After Legal and Advocacy Pressure
11
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse. State of Illinois v. Federal Emergency Management Agency
12
Homeland Security Today. Federal Courts Block FEMA DHS Immigration Grant Conditions
13
California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services. DHS-FEMA Grant Guidance FAQs
14
Office of the Michigan Attorney General. Attorney General Nessel Leads Lawsuit Challenging Illegal Terms to FEMA Grants
15
Office of the Maryland Attorney General. State of Michigan, et al. v. Kristi Noem, et al. Complaint
16
Bloomberg Law. FEMA Blocked From Imposing New Conditions on Emergency Grants
17
Office of the Maryland Attorney General. Attorney General Brown Secures Order Protecting FEMA Funding From Illegal Conditions
18
National Association of Counties. States File Lawsuit Challenging FEMA’s New Rules for Emergency Management Grants
19
WLOS. North Carolina Wins $17 Million Lawsuit Against FEMA
20
Santa Clara County Newsroom. County and Partners File Lawsuit Over Trump Administration Attack on Disaster Preparedness Funding
21
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse. County of Santa Clara v. Noem
22
Roll Call. Federal Unions Ask Court to Halt FEMA Position Cuts
23
AFGE. AFGE Leads Coalition Lawsuit Challenging FEMA Staffing Cuts
24
AFGE. AFGE Leads Coalition in Seeking Emergency Order to Prevent FEMA Dismantling
25
Workers’ Legal Defense. Litigation Tracker
26
U.S. Government Accountability Office. B-337204.2
27
The Hill. Trump FEMA Grants Violation
28
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse. Corporation for Public Broadcasting v. Federal Emergency Management Agency
29
Current. FEMA Limits NGWS Applicants to States and Tribal Nations, Bypassing CPB
30
CourtListener. Corporation for Public Broadcasting v. Federal Emergency Management Agency