Twenty-three attorneys general have asked for a two-week ban on a federal funding freeze in a draft temporary restraining order filed Thursday morning in U.S. District Court in Providence.
Twenty-three attorneys general have asked for a two-week ban on a federal funding freeze in a draft temporary restraining order filed Thursday morning in U.S. District Court in Providence.
S.Gnatiuk/Envato

Rhode Island federal judge strikes down Trump edict tying federal disaster aid to immigration

Share
Twenty-three attorneys general have asked for a two-week ban on a federal funding freeze in a draft temporary restraining order filed Thursday morning in U.S. District Court in Providence.
Twenty-three attorneys general have asked for a two-week ban on a federal funding freeze in a draft temporary restraining order filed Thursday morning in U.S. District Court in Providence.
S.Gnatiuk/Envato
Rhode Island federal judge strikes down Trump edict tying federal disaster aid to immigration
Copy

States don’t have to help enforce the Trump administration’s immigration policies to get disaster aid from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a federal judge in Providence ruled Wednesday.

Senior U.S. District Judge William E. Smith of the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island granted a motion for a permanent injunction against the Department of Homeland Security, calling a federal directive issued in April “coercive, ambiguous, unrelated to the purpose of the federal grants, and undermine(s) the system of federalism.”

The directive made enforcing the administration’s immigration detention policy agenda a condition for receiving federal disaster relief aid.

“States rely on these grants for billions of dollars annually in disaster relief,” wrote Smith, a George W. Bush appointee. “Denying such funding if states refuse to comply with vague immigration requirements leaves them with no meaningful choice, particularly where state budgets are already committed.”

A group of 20 Democratic state attorneys general filed suit against the Department of Homeland Security in May, claiming the agency lacked the legal authority to require states to abide by immigration policy in order to receive funding.

They argued in their initial lawsuit that not only was the policy unconstitutional, but violated the Administrative Procedure Act.

Like all Democratic lawsuits, the AGs called the decision “arbitrary and capricious.” The Department of Homeland Security disagreed, arguing that conditions align with its core mission of enforcing federal immigration law.

But that was not enough of a justification for Smith.

“Such platitudes cannot substitute for an actual explanation of why it is necessary to attach sweeping immigration conditions to all the grants at issue here,” he wrote.

Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha called Smith’s ruling a “win for the rule of law” and reaffirmed that President Donald Trump cannot pick and choose what federal laws to follow.

“Today’s permanent injunction by Judge Smith says, in no uncertain terms, that this Administration may not illegally impose immigration conditions on congressionally allocated federal funding for emergency services like disaster relief and flood mitigation,” Neronha said in a statement. “Case closed.”

A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

This story was originally published by the Rhode Island Current.

The state senator shares his takeaways from the Washington Bridge hearing and weighs in on gun policy, health care strains, and the push for a new medical school at URI
A group of nonprofits from Rhode Island found themselves at the heart of a dispute over food aid that reached all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court
New research led by Brown University scientists suggests cannabis may curb short-term alcohol consumption — but raises big questions about swapping one substance for another
Federal budget cuts will yank SNAP, Medicaid from thousands of lawful immigrants
Rhode Island’s junior U.S. Senator says many international leaders at the COP30 conference finally recognized the necessity of addressing the rising cost of property insurance caused by more frequent and intense weather events
Spotted lanternflies, Japanese barberry, Oriental bittersweet – When plants and animals like these invade our environment, they can disrupt other organisms that are native to the region. But can we stop these species? And should we?