Great Lakes Wire

A federal court has ruled in favor of Michigan and 20 other states in a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s attempt to tie federal emergency services funding to state cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. The District Court for the District of Rhode Island granted summary judgment to the coalition, which argued that conditioning billions of dollars in disaster preparedness funds on immigration enforcement was unconstitutional and unlawful.

The case focused on actions taken earlier this year by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), led by Secretary Kristi Noem. In February, DHS ordered its agencies, including the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), to stop providing funding to jurisdictions that did not help enforce federal immigration law. In March, DHS required recipients of federal funds to certify their cooperation with these enforcement efforts or risk losing access to significant public safety resources.

Attorney General Dana Nessel described the outcome as a significant protection for Michigan residents. “This ruling makes clear that no administration can hold appropriated federal funds hostage to advance a political agenda,” Nessel said. “Michigan residents deserve to know the public safety resources their tax dollars support will be there to protect them when disasters strike. I remain committed to ensuring our communities have access to the resources they need when it matters most.”

In its decision, the court found that DHS violated both the Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act by imposing vague and arbitrary conditions on emergency preparedness grants. The court noted that these new requirements forced states into an uncertain position: “making compliance a nearly impossible-to-achieve moving target.” States were left unsure about how they could meet federal demands without risking vital funding.

The court also determined that tying emergency grants—which are intended for disaster response and prevention—to immigration enforcement exceeded DHS’s legal authority. It held that such conditions had no factual basis connected to grant purposes like responding to terrorism or natural disasters.

In 2024, Michigan received more than $60 million from DHS-related grants and nearly $257 million from FEMA for specific disaster events, underlining what was at stake in the litigation.

The multistate lawsuit included attorneys general from California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawai‘i, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin.