Attorney General James Sues U.S. Department of Homeland Security to Protect Emergency Preparedness and Disaster Relief Funding

NEW YORK – New York Attorney General Letitia James and 19 other attorneys general today filed a lawsuit to block new U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) conditions that unlawfully tie emergency management and disaster relief funding to state immigration enforcement actions. Since January, Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem and other administration officials have engaged in a concerted, coordinated effort to pressure states to assist with the administration’s mass deportation agenda. Now, Secretary Noem has given states an ultimatum: cooperate with the administration on civil immigration enforcement or lose out on essential funding for emergency preparedness and disaster response efforts. Attorney General James and the coalition argue that DHS’s attempt to use federal funds as leverage to compel state immigration action violates the Constitution and puts communities at risk. The attorneys general are seeking a court order declaring these conditions unlawful and protecting states’ access to life-saving emergency management funds.

“DHS is holding states hostage by forcing them to choose between disaster preparedness and enabling the administration’s illegal and chaotic immigration agenda,” said Attorney General James. “This funding is vital to keeping New Yorkers safe during hurricanes, floods, and other catastrophes. The federal government cannot weaponize disaster relief to coerce states into abandoning public safety and community trust. My office will fight to ensure all New Yorkers are protected – both from tragic disasters and from cruel and unnecessary immigration policies.”

In recent months, DHS has imposed sweeping new requirements on its grant programs, mandating that states divert law enforcement resources to support federal civil immigration enforcement or risk losing billions of dollars in funding for emergency preparedness, disaster relief, and cybersecurity. States have also been ordered to immediately halt any program that “benefits” undocumented immigrants or “incentivizes” illegal immigration. Attorney General James and the coalition assert that DHS has no legal basis to withhold critical emergency funding and cannot lawfully force states to choose between disaster preparedness and long-standing public safety policies that build trust between law enforcement and immigrant communities.

The attorneys general argue that the at-risk funding was authorized by Congress to mitigate, prepare for, respond to, and recover from disasters, not to enforce federal immigration policies. These grants fund essential emergency operations, including first responder salaries, training programs, and building improvements to protect houses of worship and schools from malicious attacks. They support search and rescue missions, food aid, and recovery efforts after major disasters. The attorneys general highlight that many of the grant programs at risk were created in response to national emergencies like the September 11 attacks and Hurricane Katrina, including:

• State Homeland Security Program (SHSP), which was established after 9/11 to support state counterterrorism and emergency preparedness efforts, including the creation of bomb squads, SWAT teams, and hazmat units;
• Urban Area Security Initiative, which was also established after 9/11 to fund cities’ counterterrorism and emergency response efforts;
• Emergency Management Performance Grant Program, which was established after 9/11 and made permanent after Hurricane Katrina to strengthen state and local emergency management;
• State and Local Cybersecurity Grant Program, which was created after COVID-19 to protect from cyberattacks; and
• Nonprofit Security Grant Program (NSGP), which was created in 2004 to protect nonprofits and faith-based organizations from extremist attacks.

New York received $44 million in NSGP funding last year, much of which was allocated to religious institutions and private schools at high risk of extremist violence. This funding, which in particular helps protect synagogues and Jewish day schools facing antisemitic violence, supports measures like security systems, metal detectors, and impact-resistant building upgrades. Attorney General James and the coalition argue that cutting NSGP funding would endanger vulnerable communities during a period of heightened extremist threats, especially because nonprofit organizations generally lack other funding sources for such improvements.

Disaster response funds and programs, which states rely on to rebuild communities after major natural or mass casualty events, are also at risk, including:

• Public Assistance Program, which supports emergency work in the immediate aftermath of disasters, from debris removal to temporary shelter construction;
• National Urban Search & Rescue Response System, which funds around-the-clock search and rescue operations;
• Disaster Case Management, which provides recovery planning for disaster survivors;
• Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, which assists with rebuilding in a way that reduces future risks; and
• Flood Mitigation Assistance Grants, which reduce flood damage risks in coastal communities.

Also at risk are Fire Management Assistant Grants, National Earthquake Hazards Reduction, National Dam Safety Program, National Flood Insurance Program Community Assistance Grants, Port Security Grants, State Recreational Boating Safety Grants, and grants to participate in the FEMA Flood Mapping program.

New York in particular stands to lose hundreds of millions of dollars in emergency preparedness funding under DHS’s new conditions, including resources for certified bomb squads, the New York State Intelligence Center, SWAT teams, and hazmat units. Additionally, New York relies on DHS grants for more than $30 billion in FEMA Public Assistance funding, which has been critical in responding to disasters like Superstorm Sandy, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the 2024 tornadoes and flooding in Upstate New York.

Attorney General James and the coalition argue that DHS is presenting states with an impossible choice. Either they forego the millions of dollars in federal funds that Congress has appropriated – and which their emergency preparedness and response efforts rely on – or they undermine their law-enforcement efforts by diverting their resources to enforce federal immigration law. More critically, accepting these unlawful terms would destroy the trust that many states have worked hard to build between immigrant communities and law enforcement, threatening the public safety of all residents who rely on law enforcement’s ability to solve crimes and bring culprits to justice.

The attorneys general contend that DHS is unlawfully using federal funds to coerce states into adhering to the administration’s civil immigration enforcement policies – exceeding the grant programs’ scope and violating constitutional limits on executive power. The attorneys general are asking the court to declare these conditions unlawful and block DHS and the federal government from using vital emergency funds as leverage to enforce immigration policies.

Joining Attorney General James in filing this lawsuit are the attorneys general of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, Wisconsin, and Vermont.