Original Date Announced

According to a lawsuit filed by almost 30 counties against the Trump administration, DHS has modified its "Standard Terms and Conditions" for localities receiving certain grants from FEMA. Among others, the new conditions require grant recipients and subrecipients to agree to cooperate with ICE and other federal immigration-enforcement activities; agree to comply with all present and future executive orders; and agree to and certify compliance with new DEI standards. The funding at issue includes grants under the Emergency Management Performance Grant Program; Homeland Security Grant Program; Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program; and others.

The complaint alleges that these conditions violate the separation of powers, the Constitution's Spending Clause, and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Plaintiff counties ask the court to declare these conditions unlawful and set them aside, and order the government not to retaliate against any county for their participation in the lawsuit. County of Santa Clara v. Noem, No. 3:25-cv-08330 (N.D. Cal.).

**Link to case here. Our litigation entries generally report only the initial complaint and any major substantive filings or decisions. For additional information, CourtListener provides access to PACER and all available pleadings. Other sites that track litigation in more detail or organize cases by topic include Civil Rights Clearinghouse, Justice Action Center, National Immigration Litigation Alliance, and Just Security**

Trump 2.0 [ID #2001]

Subsequent Trump and Court Action

2025.2.19: Illinois v. FEMA - Noem Memo Restricting Grant Funding for Sanctuary Jurisdictions

DHS Secretary Noem sent a memorandum directing agencies to review all federal financial assistance awards to determine if DHS is funding "sanctuary jurisdictions" and, if so, to cease that funding. The memorandum defines the following as "sanctuary jurisdictions":

• Jurisdictions that fail to comply with the information sharing requirements of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1373 and 1644.
• Jurisdictions that encourage a noncitizen to enter or reside in the U.S., or that harbor or shield noncitizens from detection;
• Jurisdictions that fail to honor DHS requests for cooperation;
• Jurisdictions that fail to provide access to detainees; and
• Jurisdictions that leak the existence of an enforcement operation.

Illinois v. FEMA, No. 1:25-cv-00206 (D.R.I.).

**Link to case here. See litigation note above**

Subsequent Trump and Court Action

2025.10.02 Reported: In unusual move, FEMA halts preparedness grant money, orders states to recount their populations excluding deported migrants - CNN

CNN reports that FEMA is withholding more than $300 million in emergency-preparedness grants from states until they certify that their population estimates, used to determine grant allocations, exclude deported migrants. It is unclear how states are expected to count the number of deportees.

Emergency Management Performance Grants help states and territories improve their readiness for and resilience to extreme weather by paying for emergency-management staff, training, equipment, and public education. A FEMA spokesperson discussed "prevent[ing] fraud and abuse" and ensuring "equitable distribution" in light of population shifts. However, experts have warned that the new requirement could delay essential funds needed for day-to-day operations of many state and local emergency-management agencies.

Subsequent Trump and Court Action

2025.10.24 Amended Complaint - Illinois v. Noem

12 states and the District of Columbia filed an amended complaint to challenge the new population-certification requirement reported by CNN. Plaintiffs allege that on September 30, 2025, DHS issued amended Emergency Management Performance Grant awards that imposed a new requirement for states to certify their own populations excluding deported migrants. The complaint states that “[r]eal-time population figures are simply impossible to provide, and they are made doubly impossible by the demand to incorporate information about deportations that DHS alone holds.” Plaintiffs also challenge FEMA’s decision to reduce their funding under the Homeland Security Grant Program; they allege that FEMA reduced allocations only of certain states it views as “sanctuary” jurisdictions, while increasing other states’ allocations.

Plaintiffs argue that the population-certification requirement and reallocation decision violate the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The original complaint, challenging only the reallocation decision, was filed on September 29, 2025. Illinois v. Noem, No. 1:25-cv-00495 (D.R.I.).

**Link to case here. See litigation note above**

Subsequent Trump and Court Action

2025.11.04 Complaint - Michigan v. Noem

Eleven states filed a complaint challenging the Trump administration's population-certification requirement. Plaintiffs challenge this requirement on four grounds. First, they argue that it exceeds DHS’s statutory authority, as no statute permits DHS to impose such a hold. Second, it is contrary to law because 13 U.S.C. § 183 requires federal agencies to use U.S. Census Bureau data to allocate federal grant funding; a federal agency cannot require states to develop their own methodologies and data and provide their own population figures. Third, it is arbitrary and capricious in violation of the APA. Fourth, it was issued without observance of PRA procedural requirements. Michigan v. Noem, No. 6:25-cv-02053 (D. Or.).

**Link to case here. See litigation note above**

Subsequent Trump and Court Action

2025.11.21 Order Granting PI - Santa Clara v. Noem

A federal judge entered a preliminary injunction ordering FEMA and DHS to stop conditioning funds, including disaster emergency-preparedness grants, on conditions about local law-enforcement assisting immigration enforcement and about restricting DEI actions. County of Santa Clara v. Noem, No. 3:25-cv-08330 (N.D. Cal.).

**Link to case here. See litigation note above**

Subsequent Trump and Court Action

2025.12.22 Memorandum and Order - Illinois v. Noem

A federal judge ordered the Department of Homeland Security to restore $233 million in funding through the Homeland Security Grant Program and Emergency Management Performance Grant Program to states determined to be sanctuary jurisdictions. The opinion states that the government's decision to reallocate funding based on sanctuary status violated the Administrative Procedure Act because it was arbitrary and capricious, given that Congress did not intend that factor to be considered in decisions regarding counterterrorism funding provision, and that the government failed to justify or explain its decisions. The judge ordered the government to set aside their new funding requirements and allocations from Fall 2025 and to restore funding that was previously designated to the states. Illinois v. Noem, No. 1:25-cv-00495 (D.R.I.).

**Link to case here. See litigation note above**

Subsequent Trump and Court Action

2025.12.23 Opinion and Order - Michigan v. Noem

Magistrate Judge Amy Potter granted plaintiff states' motion for summary judgment. She found that the population certification requirement is unlawful under the Administrative Procedure Act, as it exceeds the federal government's statutory authority, is contrary to law, and is arbitrary and capricious. Judge Potter vacated the condition from plaintiff states' FEMA award notices and enjoined the Trump administration from implementing the requirement for plaintiff states. Michigan v. Noem, No. 6:25-cv-02053 (D. Or.).

**Link to case here. See litigation note above**