A federal court today struck down the Trump administration’s illegal attempt to use anti-terrorism funds to coerce local governments into changing their election rules ahead of the midterm elections.
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted summary judgment to six counties and cities, ruling that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) acted unlawfully by attempting to withhold tens of millions of dollars in anti-terrorism funding unless local governments adopted certain election rules.
The court’s decision comes weeks before the midterm elections and ensures that local governments can continue to access essential public safety funding—used to train first responders and bolster counterterrorism efforts—without being forced to overhaul already-secure elections and adopt policies that the administration has tried and failed to impose through executive orders and stalled legislation.
The court ruling vacates election administration conditions FEMA imposed on the Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP) funds, including a shift away from voting machines, a five percent manual audit of paper ballots, and use of DHS’s error-filled Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) system. Established after the September 11 terrorist attacks, the HSGP was created to help local governments prevent and respond to acts of terrorism.
Six counties and cities sued DHS and FEMA, arguing the agencies had no authority to tie anti-terrorism funding to election requirements. They warned these new mandates would be costly, impractical, and unlawful. This decision affirms what the plaintiffs already knew: power over elections belongs to the states and Congress, not to a federal agency using public safety dollars as leverage. The plaintiffs are represented by Protect Democracy, the Brennan Center for Justice, Jacobson Lawyers Group, and Public Rights Project, as well as county counsel.
“[T]he statute gives FEMA the authority to fund projects proposed by states and high-risk urban areas; it does not give FEMA authority to use the possibility of grants to induce states or high-risk urban areas to carry out the federal government’s preferred projects at their own expense,” the court held.
The Trump administration’s attempt to hold HSGP federal funds hostage marked the latest tactic in its coordinated effort to give the federal government influence in state-run elections. With the 2026 midterms only weeks away, the court’s ruling makes clear that such interference violates federal law and the Constitution.
“Nashville knows how to run secure elections, and we don’t need Washington dictating the terms in exchange for the public safety funding our residents depend on," said Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County’s Director of Law, Tyler Yarbro. “Today’s ruling demonstrates the necessity of the checks and balances the Trump administration is actively trying to eliminate.”
“Today’s win is the result of cities and counties standing together against blatant federal overreach that jeopardized public safety,” said Abbie Kamin, Harris County Attorney. “The court agreed that holding public safety funding hostage to force the president’s agenda is dangerous and illegal. Under our laws, states and localities control our elections, and today’s ruling reaffirms that.”
“Thanks to the court’s decision, Columbus’s law enforcement agencies will now see this funding with no political strings attached, as Congress intended,” said Columbus City Attorney Zach Klein. “The Trump administration never had the authority to hold public safety dollars hostage, and this ruling makes clear that these funds belong in our communities—not behind a political litmus test.”
“El Paso County has run elections responsibly for decades,” said El Paso County Attorney Christina Sanchez. “Conditioning our counterterrorism funding on an unproven citizenship-verification system was reckless, and today’s ruling stops this gross abuse of power in its tracks.”
“Once again, the courts have made it clear: the federal government cannot trample the law or the Constitution to strongarm cities, counties, and states, including through the withholding of funds that communities are owed,” said Travis County Attorney Delia Garza. “We will continue to defend local jurisdictions’ right to run their own elections and hold this administration accountable at every turn.”
“Dallas County’s number one priority is the safety of our residents. We rely on HSGP funding to provide the training and equipment necessary for our law enforcement and emergency rapid response teams, ” said Dallas County Attorney John Creuzot. “The federal government has no right to threaten the public safety or election authority of our county. Today’s decision brings with it a collective sigh of relief among local leaders and residents.”
“The Trump Administration keeps attempting to abuse the power of the federal government to interfere in elections. And, they keep failing,” said Protect Democracy’s Special Counsel & Program Lead for Free and Fair Elections, Jacek Pruski. “Today’s ruling is yet another reminder that we have the power to stop them.”
“Today’s ruling confirms what we’ve said all along: conditioning public safety funding on unrelated election policy demands is unlawful,” said Lauren Miller Karalunas, Senior Counsel, Democracy Program, at the Brennan Center for Justice. “States and Congress — not the executive branch — make the rules for elections. Thanks to today’s decision, localities will continue to receive their federal public safety funding in full and use it to protect their communities without federal pressure to change the way they run elections.”
“Today’s ruling protects local governments’ authority to run their own elections,” said Toby Merrill, litigation director for Public Rights Project. “The decision also makes clear that the federal government can’t hold critical public safety funding hostage to force election policy changes. These funds exist to keep communities safe. We’re proud to stand with cities and counties protecting both their residents and their ability to administer safe and secure elections.”
Click to read more about this case and view related documents on Protect Democracy’s website here, Brennan Center’s website here, and Public Rights Project’s website here.
###
