Federal Accountability

Move marks latest attempt by Trump Administration to collect unrelated, protected data to fuel mass deportation machine

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today, leading a coalition of 21 attorneys general with New York Attorney General Letitia James, announced a lawsuit challenging the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) demand that states turn over personal and sensitive information about millions of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) recipients. SNAP is a federally-funded, state-administered program that provides billions of dollars in food assistance to tens of millions of low-income families across the country. SNAP applicants provide their private information on the understanding, backed by long-standing state and federal laws, that their information will not be used for unrelated purposes. USDA has suggested that it could withhold administrative funding for the program if states fail to comply — effectively forcing states to choose between protecting their residents’ privacy and providing critical nutrition assistance to those in need. California receives roughly $1 billion a year in order to administer the program, and any delay in that funding could be catastrophic for the state and its residents who rely on SNAP to put food on the table. In a lawsuit being filed today in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition argue that this demand violates multiple federal privacy laws and the U.S. Constitution.  

“President Trump continues to weaponize private and sensitive personal information — not to root out fraud, but to create a culture of fear where people are unwilling to apply for essential services. We’re talking about kids not getting school lunch; fire victims not accessing emergency services; and other devastating, and deadly, consequences. That is Trump’s vision for America,” said Attorney General Bonta. “This unprecedented demand that states turn over SNAP data violates all kinds of state and federal privacy laws and further breaks the trust between the federal government and the people it serves. The President doesn’t get to change the rules in the middle of the game, no matter how much he may want to. While he may be comfortable breaking promises to the American people, California is not. We will not comply with this illegal demand. We’ll see the President in court.”

For 60 years, California and other states have administered SNAP, which serves as an essential safety net for millions of low-income Americans by providing credits that can be used to purchase groceries for themselves and their family members. In those 60 years, the federal government and state agencies have worked together to build a robust process for ensuring that only eligible individuals receive benefits. In fact, the USDA itself has described SNAP as having “one of the most rigorous quality control systems in the federal government.” Those systems do not, and have never, required that states turn over sensitive, personally identifying information about millions of Americans without any meaningful restrictions on how that information is used or shared with other agencies. 

Yet in May 2025, USDA made an unprecedented demand that states turn over massive amounts of personal information on all SNAP applicants and recipients, including social security numbers and home addresses, dating back five years. Even a year’s worth of SNAP recipient data contains sensitive, personal identifying information on tens of millions of individuals — including more than five million in California alone. The federal government’s stated justifications for its unprecedented data demands, to “prevent fraud and abuse,” are directly contradicted by their own findings.  

Alarmingly, USDA’s demand appears to be part of a coordinated effort by the federal government to collect personal information on Americans from every possible source, to be used to advance this President’s agenda. Public reports indicate that federal officials are amassing huge databases of personal information on Americans and using that data for undisclosed purposes, including immigration enforcement. Already, the Department of Homeland Security has obtained troves of personal information from both the Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Health and Human Services Agency, including private medical information and other personal details on Medicaid recipients, which California has already challenged in court. USDA’s attempts to collect data from states about SNAP applicants and recipients appear to be the next step in this campaign.   

USDA’s actions are unprecedented, threaten the privacy of millions of families, and ignore long-standing restrictions on the use and redisclosure of SNAP data. Both federal and state law prohibit California from disclosing personally identifying SNAP data unless strictly necessary for the administration of the program, or if other limited circumstances exist. Those circumstances do not exist here. In today’s lawsuit, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition argue that these demands violate multiple federal privacy laws; fail to meet the public comment requirements for this type of action; exceed USDA’s statutory authority; and violate the Spending Clause. The coalition asks that the District Court declare the Trump Administration’s demands unlawful and block the Trump Administration from conditioning receipt of SNAP funding on states’ compliance with these demands. 

Attorneys General Bonta and James lead the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and Wisconsin, as well as the state of Kentucky, in filing the lawsuit. 

A copy of the lawsuit is available here. 

Ruling follows SCOTUS decision sending consideration of nationwide injunction back to lower courts 

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today issued a statement on the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts’s decision confirming the nationwide scope of its preliminary injunction in the multistate lawsuit challenging President Trump’s unconstitutional executive order seeking to end the constitutional right to birthright citizenship. The court concluded that “no workable, narrower alternative to the injunction issued originally would provide complete relief to the plaintiffs in this case.”

“Today’s decision leaves in place a nationwide injunction in our lawsuit challenging the President’s executive order attempting to end the constitutional right to birthright citizenship while litigation continues,” said Attorney General Bonta. “It also reaffirms what we’ve argued from the start: Our states are harmed if those born in the United States are deprived of the right to citizenship. And it is unrealistic and infeasible to recognize the citizenship of those born in some states, but not others. We are pleased that the district court agreed. We will continue to fight to make sure this unconstitutional, anti-American executive order is blocked for good.”

A copy of the court’s decision is available here.

Agreement prevents Trump Administration from making any changes to eligibility requirements based on immigration status for these programs before September 3, 2025 

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta and a coalition of 20 other attorneys general today announced securing an agreement temporarily preventing the Trump Administration from implementing various agency notices significantly expanding federal public benefit ineligibility based on immigration status before September 3, 2025. Earlier this week, the coalition filed a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s abrupt reversal of nearly three decades of federal practice that allowed access, regardless of immigration status, to certain public benefits programs that have historically been determined to protect life or safety and contribute to the overall welfare of communities. These programs include Head Start, childcare services for low-income people, adult education, mental health and substance use disorder programs, and shelters for at-risk youth and domestic violence survivors, among others. The coalition continues to seek a court order enjoining the Trump Administration from implementing the order for the duration of the litigation. 

“The Trump Administration threw Head Start and other social safety net programs into chaos when it abruptly reversed nearly three decades of federal law and policy that opened these programs up to all,” said Attorney General Bonta. “With today’s agreement, these critical programs — and the families who rely on them — can breathe a little easier. California will not back down in the fight to protect access to these programs that help ensure that our communities thrive.”

A copy of the stipulation is available here. 

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today, as part of a coalition of 23 attorneys general and two states, expanded its ongoing legal challenge of the Trump Administration’s attempt to gut AmeriCorps by adding the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) as a defendant for withholding tens of millions of dollars in funding for critical service programs. In June, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition secured a court order that reinstated hundreds of AmeriCorps programs that were unlawfully cancelled and barred AmeriCorps from making similar cuts without formal rulemaking. Despite this order, OMB is withholding vast sums intended for outstanding service programs, threatening their survival and the wellbeing of those who depend on their services. Because of the Trump Administration’s withholding of these critical resources, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition today filed an amended lawsuit that adds OMB as a defendant and brings new legal claims against the agency. 

“AmeriCorps represents the best of who we are, what we can be, as a nation,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Last month, I secured a court order stopping the illegal dismantling of AmeriCorps – ensuring these selfless servicemembers can continue to serve our communities while litigation continues. But now, President Trump is trying a different, yet similarly, illegal tactic to withhold funding. We’re going back to court to block this latest maneuver – and we’ll keep fighting to ensure this invaluable program continues.”   

AmeriCorps, an independent federal agency that engages Americans in meaningful community-based service, provides opportunities for more than 200,000 Americans to serve their communities every year. AmeriCorps supports national and state community service programs by funding and placing volunteers in local and national organizations that address critical community needs. Organizations rely on support from AmeriCorps to recruit, place, and supervise AmeriCorps members nationwide. 

In 2024, more than 6,150 California members served at least 1,200 locations, including schools, food banks, homeless shelters, health clinics, youth centers, veterans’ facilities, and other nonprofit and faith-based organizations. AmeriCorps invested more than $133 million in federal funding to California that same year to support cost-effective community solutions, working with local partners on the ground to help communities tackle their toughest challenges. This includes programs like:

• Prevent Child Abuse California, which hosts 65 AmeriCorps members who provide academic assistance, life skills, and financial literacy to hundreds of foster youths across 15 counties. 
• Partnership for Veterans and People Experiencing Homeless, which hosts 25 AmeriCorps members that provide housing services, job placement, and case management to veterans and homeless individuals in Santa Barbara County.
• Reading Partners California, which hosts 80 AmeriCorps members who recruit and manage approximately 1400 volunteers to provide one-on-one literacy tutoring to students at 58 low-income elementary schools.

In the amended complaint, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition allege that OMB has unlawfully withheld from plaintiff states well over $38 million in support intended for specific AmeriCorps programs, across multiple funding streams. For example, OMB appears to have withheld tens of millions of dollars intended for AmeriCorps Senior Companion Programs and Foster Grandparent Programs in plaintiff states, programs that pair low-income seniors with children in need of mentorship and support or with other seniors in need of companionship and care. The Administration has also withheld approximately $5 million intended for plaintiff state service commissions, which was needed to provide training and technical assistance to service members across the country. And while AmeriCorps decided to fund numerous programs in plaintiff states with over $33 million in highly competitive grants for the next service year, OMB is preparing to withhold these funds from distribution as well.    

The coalition establishes that the Trump Administration has acted unlawfully in its withholding of AmeriCorps funds, violating both the Administrative Procedure Act and the separation of powers under the U.S. Constitution. Congress created AmeriCorps and appropriated funding to support public service, and neither OMB nor AmeriCorps hold authority to defy Congress by refusing to distribute funds to worthy service programs.   

In filing the amended complaint, Attorney General Bonta and the attorneys general of Maryland, Delaware, and Colorado lead the attorneys general of Arizona, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, the District of Columbia, as well as the states of Kentucky and Pennsylvania. 

A copy of the amended complaint is available here. 

Statute and longstanding federal policy have allowed access, regardless of immigration status, to specific community programs, including those deemed necessary for protection of life or safety 

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today sued the Trump Administration over its abrupt decision to restrict access to more than a dozen public benefit programs based on immigration status. This decision is contrary to law and a reversal of nearly three decades of federal practice allowing access, regardless of immigration status, to certain public benefits programs that have historically been determined to protect life or safety and contribute to the overall welfare of communities. In doing so, the Trump Administration has thrown programs across California into chaos and cruelly jeopardized the health and wellbeing of some of our most vulnerable families. At risk is access to Head Start, childcare services for low-income people, adult education, mental health and substance use disorder programs, and shelters for at-risk youth and domestic violence survivors, among many other safety-net programs. Attorney General Bonta, alongside a coalition of 20 other attorneys general, asks the court to enjoin the Trump Administration from implementing this devastating change, arguing that these new polices threaten the outright collapse of the states’ social safety nets.

“Let’s be clear: This latest salvo in the President’s inhumane anti-immigration campaign primarily goes after working moms and their young children. We’re not talking about waste, fraud, and abuse, we’re talking about programs that deliver essential childcare, healthcare, nutrition, and education assistance, programs that have for decades been open to all because we understand that we are better off when everyone has the chance to succeed.” said Attorney General Bonta. “The Trump Administration’s abrupt reversal of nearly three decades of precedent – and decision to put at risk not just support for undocumented families, but ultimately families who rely on these programs nationwide – is cruel, but unfortunately unsurprising. So is its lack of regard for the law. Six months into the second Trump Administration, I’ll repeat a familiar refrain: We’ll see President Trump in court.” 

Since 1997, the federal government has interpreted The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) to permit states’ use of federal funds for certain programs that serve communities based on need regardless of immigration status. These programs work precisely because there are few barriers to access and include: 

• Short-term shelter or housing assistance for people who are unhoused, for survivors of domestic violence, or for at-risk youth.
• Programs, services, or assistance to help individuals during periods of heat, cold, or other adverse weather conditions (e.g., cooling centers).
• Soup kitchens, community food banks, senior nutrition programs such as meals on wheels, and other such community nutritional services for persons requiring special assistance.
• Medical and public health services (including treatment and prevention of diseases and injuries) and mental health, disability, or substance use treatment. 
• Early childhood education, childcare services for low-income people, and adult education programs.

Earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Labor, and Department of Education issued notices related to the interpretation of “federal public benefit” under PRWORA restricting numerous “noncitizens” from receiving benefits under federally funded programs. Around the same time, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued its own notice revoking every one of the “life or safety” exemptions that DOJ had put in place 29 years earlier. 

In California, the effects of these actions will be devastating – and immediate. The Head Start Program, founded in 1965, was designed to help break the cycle of poverty by providing young children from families with low incomes a comprehensive program to meet their emotional, social, health, nutritional, and educational needs. In 2023-24, California’s 100 direct Head Start regional recipients served over 80,345 children and families at 1,842 individual site locations. The Trump Administration’s new polices, which will require programs to verify immigration status, are expected to have a chilling effect, leading to decreased enrollment from participants, and an administrative and financial burden for recipients. Moreover, if regional recipients do not hit mandatory 97% enrollment targets, they will lose federal funding and these programs will shut down, harming all the children they serve, as well as the more than 25,000 staff members these programs employ, including in rural communities where Head Start is often a large employer.  

Examples like this are countless across the public benefits programs at risk through the Trump Administration’s actions. Survivors of domestic violence and at-risk youth may be fearful of seeking services at shelters. Mixed status families may forgo access to public benefit services all together. Requiring citizenship or immigration status verification of any kind fundamentally creates a barrier to access. People will be reluctant to reach out to access needed services or to call for help for others who might benefit from such services. And requiring programs to expend resources to implement systems and train staff to verify citizenship or immigration status will impose a time and resource burden on programs already struggling to operate on narrow financial margins.

In today’s filings, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition argue that the Trump Administration’s abrupt announcement further limiting access to public benefit programs for undocumented individuals fails to provide notice and an opportunity to comment, is arbitrary and capricious, and contrary to law in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act, and fails to give the states “fair notice” as required under the Spending Clause. They highlight that instead of saving money, the new verification requirements will lead to an overall cost to their states’ economies in the amount of hundreds of millions of dollars each year and will endanger the ability of these programs to continue providing services to all of the residents of their states, not just noncitizens. They urge the court to preliminary enjoin the Trump Administration from implementing the order to prevent programs from shuttering, uncertainty, and tremendous impacts on the public health, education, and welfare of their states.

Attorney General Bonta joins the attorneys general of New York, Washington, Rhode Island, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Hawai‘i, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, and Wisconsin in filing the lawsuit.  

A copy of the lawsuit is available here. A copy of the motion for a preliminary injunction is available here.

California is suing the Trump Administration to stop the illegal sharing of Medicaid data and to prevent private data from being used for immigration enforcement 

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today responded to new reports that the Trump Administration has illegally provided Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) with access to the personal, sensitive data of Medicaid recipients. This data sharing agreement, alarmingly, comes more than a week after Attorney General Bonta led a multistate coalition in filing a lawsuit challenging the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ decision to provide unfettered access to individual personal health data to ICE earlier this month. A hearing on their motion for a preliminary injunction is scheduled for August 7, 2025. 

“I’m deeply disturbed by the Trump Administration’s reckless and unprecedented weaponization of the private, sensitive data of Medicaid recipients,” said Attorney General Bonta. “It is devastating to think that individuals may not seek essential medical care because they are afraid that if they do so, they may be targeted by this Administration. We sued President Trump and his lackeys after we received initial reports of this illegal data sharing earlier this month. Despite this, the Trump Administration appears to have entered into a new illegal data sharing agreement with ICE. We are moving quickly to secure a court order blocking the sharing of this data for immigration enforcement. The President’s efforts to pull personal, private, and unrelated health data to create a mass deportation machine cannot be allowed to continue.” 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today led a coalition of 20 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto, et al. vs. United States Department of Health and Human Services, et al., in support of a challenge to the Trump Administration’s abrupt termination of funding for legal services for unaccompanied immigrant children. In their brief, the attorneys general urge the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to affirm the preliminary injunction issued by the district court, arguing that the Trump Administration’s termination of federal funding for legal representation undermines the efforts of Amici States’ in ensuring the safety of unaccompanied children.

“As the People’s Attorney I am committed to protecting the safety, wellbeing, and rights of all children – including immigrant children – and ensuring that they have access to legal representation,” said Attorney General Bonta. “The Trump Administration’s attempt to roll back the rights of unaccompanied children not only undermines their safety but also increases the risk of legal complications, educational challenges, and other lasting harms.”

Attorney General Bonta and the multistate coalition have a strong interest in protecting the rights of unaccompanied immigrant children, as many of these children will eventually be released to sponsors in their states. In fiscal year 2024, approximately 10,800 unaccompanied children were released to sponsors in California — 11 percent of all unaccompanied children released to sponsors that year and the second-highest number of released children after Texas. These children become important members of their communities, students in their schools, and eventually, parents of their own families. Forcing these children to spend prolonged time in federal custody will make it more difficult for them to thrive in their communities upon release. A robust body of research shows that prolonged time in immigration custody is particularly harmful for children’s physical and mental health and disrupts their development.

In the amicus brief, the coalition urges the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to affirm the preliminary injunction issued by the district court, arguing that:

• Federal law recognizes the importance of providing legal representation to unaccompanied children in immigration proceedings.

• The termination of federal funding for legal representation for unaccompanied children will significantly increase the gaps in funding for legal services and legal service providers resulting in funding and staffing shortfalls.

• Unaccompanied children will experience various long-lasting harms without access to the multidisciplinary support and advocacy that legal representation provides.

In filing the amicus brief, Attorney General Bonta leads the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawai’i, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington.

A copy of the brief can be found here.

By the Trump Administration's own estimates, the rule will cause up to 1.8 million people to lose their health insurance

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today co-led with the attorneys general of Massachusetts and New Jersey, a multistate coalition in filing a lawsuit challenging an unlawful final rule promulgated by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) that would create significant barriers to obtaining healthcare under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The Trump Administration’s final rule would make numerous amendments to rules governing federal and state health insurance marketplaces which the administration estimates will cause up to 1.8 million people to lose their health insurance, while causing millions more to pay increased insurance premiums and out-of-pocket costs like copays and deductibles. The final rule also excludes coverage of gender-affirming care as an essential health benefit (EHB) under the ACA. In the lawsuit, the attorneys general argue that the HHS and CMS rule is arbitrary and capricious, contrary to law, and violates the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The coalition is also seeking preliminary relief, and a stay, to prevent the challenged portions of the final rule from taking effect in the Plaintiff States before the August 25 effective date.

“Far from delivering on their promises to drive down costs and ‘make America healthier’ the Trump Administration’s HHS and CMS are doing their best to make it harder and more expensive for Americans to obtain health insurance and access care,” said Attorney General Bonta. “These sweeping changes would impose onerous verification requirements, junk health insurance premiums for some consumers, shorten enrollment periods in federal and state healthcare exchanges like Covered California, deprive up to 1.8 million Americans of health insurance, drive up out-of-pocket healthcare costs and so much more. It’s unlawful and it’s wrong – we’re meeting the Trump Administration in court to defend Americans’ healthcare coverage.”

Congress enacted the ACA in 2010 to increase the number of Americans with health insurance and decrease the cost of healthcare. Fifteen years later, the Act continues to meet its goals, with annual enrollment on the ACA marketplace doubling over the past five years, resulting in over 24 million people signing up for health insurance coverage in plan year 2025 on the ACA exchanges and receiving subsidies to make such coverage affordable, including millions of people in the Plaintiff States. Now, with less than four months until open enrollment for plan year 2026 begins, the Trump Administration’s final rule would abruptly reverse that trend, erecting a series of new barriers to enrollment that will deprive up to 1.8 million people of insurance coverage by the Administration’s own estimates, and significantly drive up the costs incurred by Plaintiff States in providing healthcare, including increasing state expenditures on Medicaid, uncompensated emergency care, and funding other services provided to newly uninsured residents.

California has approximately two million ACA plan enrollees, the third highest of any state. The final rule by HHS would make substantial changes to the operation of the ACA marketplaces, including adding new bureaucratic barriers, imposing an automatic monthly charge on all automatically reenrolled consumers who qualify for $0 premiums, shortening the open enrollment period for signing up for health coverage, and making other changes which will make coverage less affordable for millions of individuals nationwide. The final rule would also exclude gender-affirming care as an EHB on federal exchange plans, leaving states responsible for paying for the portion of insurance premiums attributable to any such coverage (but the availability of such care in California would not be impacted).  

In the lawsuit, the attorneys general argue that the HHS and CMS rule is unlawful, arbitrary and capricious, and would cause significant harm to states and their residents. All of the challenged marketplace changes implemented by the final rule will be harmful to individual consumers and state and local governments. The final rule imposes burdensome and costly paperwork requirements, limits the opportunities to sign up for health coverage, substantially increases cost-sharing limits, and forces exchanges and consumers to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to prove eligibility for coverage and subsidies. These changes will result in direct and immediate costs to States as well as harms tied to decreased enrollment.

In filing the lawsuit, California Attorney General Bonta, Massachusetts Attorney General Campbell, and New Jersey Attorney General Platkin are joined by the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maryland, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin, as well as Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro. 

A copy of the complaint is available here. A copy of the motion for preliminary injunction is available here. 

Over a billion in funding potentially at stake for California projects to address flooding, wildfires, landslides, drought, and earthquakes

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today filed a lawsuit challenging the unlawful termination of the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) grant program. Since 2020, FEMA has made billions of dollars available under the BRIC program to prepare for and mitigate the risks from disasters before they happen. From flooding to wildfires to landslides to earthquakes, California is uniquely at risk from natural disasters and the largest beneficiary of this program; already, it has been awarded tens of millions of dollars, and if the program continues, could receive over a billion more for projects that FEMA had selected for grant funding. In today’s lawsuit, Attorney General Bonta, alongside a coalition of 19 other states, asks the court to compel FEMA to reverse the unlawful termination of the BRIC program so that communities across the country can protect themselves from natural disasters before they strike.  

“Nearly thirty years ago, both Democrats and Republicans in Congress recognized a simple fact: Preparing for disasters, instead of just reacting to them, saves money and lives,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Yet in the name of cutting waste, fraud, and abuse, President Trump and his lackeys have once again jeopardized public safety with their indiscriminate slashing of pre-disaster mitigation funding. We’re taking them to court – not because we want to, but because we have to. As we continue to build a climate resilient California, we deserve a federal government that is a partner, not a roadblock in our efforts – and that’s exactly what Congress intended.” 

Across five Presidential administrations, Congress and FEMA have worked together to provide funding through FEMA’s pre-disaster mitigation program so that communities across the nation can invest in projects that reduce harm from natural disasters. The rationale is simple: by proactively fortifying our communities against disasters before they strike, rather than just responding afterward, we will reduce injuries, save lives, protect property, and, ultimately, save money that would otherwise be spent on post-disaster costs. 

Given the program’s effectiveness in protecting both people and pocketbooks, it is little surprise that it has had broad bipartisan support. The bill codifying the program passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 415–2 and passed the Senate by unanimous consent before President Bill Clinton signed it. More recently, during President Trump’s first term, a bipartisan group of legislators overwhelmingly passed a bill by a vote of 398–23 in the House and 93–6 in the Senate that provided the program with an additional funding stream. And in 2021, Congress invested another $1 billion in the program through the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

In California, projects that have been awarded funding include: 

• A project in City of Rancho Palos Verdes to reduce geologic landslide movement that threatens most of the City’s residents and infrastructure, including a major arterial roadway that provides community and emergency access, sanitation sewer lines located along this roadway, electric and communication lines, potable water lines, and gas lines. Without this project, landslide movement will continue to threaten critical infrastructure, damage homes and property, and endanger lives. 
• A project in the City of Sacramento to mitigate flooding of five major interchanges, 3.9 miles of a major interstate highway, a runway at an airport, surface streets, 27,000 housing units, and more. Among other things, the project would have improved floodwall sections, improved levee sections, and relocated a pump station. 
• A project in Kern County to seismically retrofit the Kern Valley Healthcare District’s hospital that provides acute care and emergency medical services to a remote population in the mid-northern region of the Kern River Valley area. Unless seismically retrofitted, the hospital may soon need to close. This would force hundreds of thousands of Californians to seek services at hospitals over two hours away. 

In Texas, where heavy rains turned into devastating floods earlier this month, FEMA was set to provide hundreds of millions in federal funding for pre-disaster mitigation projects, including for several flood mitigation projects.

All that changed when Cameron Hamilton, who the Trump Administration unlawfully installed to act as FEMA’s Administrator, suddenly shut down the program. His unilateral decision to shutter the nation’s largest, most popular, and most cost-effective pre-disaster mitigation program is illegal. Neither Cameron Hamilton nor his successor, David Richardson, were lawfully appointed or qualified to run FEMA, as required by the Constitution’s Appointments Clause and statutory requirements. Their purported termination of the BRIC program flatly contravenes Congress’s decision to continue to fund it, in violation of the U.S. Constitution and Congress’s power of the purse. In their lawsuit filed today in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, Attorney General Bonta and a coalition urge the court to reverse FEMA’s unlawful decision to shut down this program – before the devastating impact of this loss of funding results in permanent damage to our communities.  

Attorney General Bonta joins the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin, as well as the state of Pennsylvania, in filing the lawsuit.  

A copy of the lawsuit will be available here. 

In California, over $900 million in federal education funding is frozen, jeopardizing key programs for after school and summer learning, teacher preparation, and to support students learning English

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today sued the Trump Administration over its unconstitutional, unlawful, and arbitrary decision to freeze funding for six longstanding programs administered by the U.S. Department of Education just weeks before the school year in many parts of California is set to start. In California, an estimated $939 million in federal education funding is frozen. Without this funding, many educational programs will shutter – already, ongoing summer learning programs have been left unfunded. In filing today’s lawsuit, Attorney General Bonta co-leads a coalition of 23 attorneys general and two states together with the attorneys general of Colorado, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island. The attorneys general argue that the funding freeze violates federal funding statutes and regulations authorizing these critical programs and appropriating funds for them, violates federal statutes governing the federal budgeting process, including the Antideficiency Act and Impoundment Control Act, and violates the constitutional separation of powers doctrine and the Presentment Clause. They ask the court for declaratory and injunctive relief.

“With no rhyme or reason, the Trump Administration abruptly froze billions of dollars in education funding just weeks before the start of the school year,” said Attorney General Bonta. “In doing so, it has threatened the existence of programs that provide critical after school and summer learning opportunities, that teach English to students, and that provide educational technology to our classrooms. Taken together with his other attacks on education, President Trump seems comfortable risking the academic success of a generation to further his own misguided political agenda. But as with so many of his other actions, this funding freeze is blatantly illegal, and we’re confident the court will agree.”

For decades, California and other states have used funding under these programs to carry out a broad range of programs and services, including educational programs for migrant children and English learners; programs that promote effective classroom instruction, improve school conditions and the use of technology in the classroom; community learning centers that offer students a broad range of opportunities for academic and extracurricular enrichment; and adult education and workforce development efforts.

Pursuant to federal statutory and regulatory requirements, each year the Department of Education makes around 25% of the funds for these programs available to states on or about July 1 in order to permit state and local educational agencies to plan their budgets for the academic year ahead. The plaintiff states have complied with the funding conditions set forth under the law and have state plans that the Department of Education has already approved. And the plaintiff states have received these funds, without incident, for decades, including as recently as last year. However, this year, on June 30, state agencies across the country received a notification announcing that the Department of Education would not be “obligating funds for” six formula funding programs on July 1.

This funding freeze has immediately thrown into chaos plans for the upcoming academic year. Local education agencies have approved budgets, developed staffing plans, and signed contracts to provide vital educational services under these grants. Now, as a result of the Trump Administration’s actions, states find themselves without sufficient funding for these commitments, just weeks before the start of the 2025-2026 school year. Essential summer school and afterschool programs, which provide childcare to working parents of school age children, are already being impacted. The abrupt freeze is also wreaking havoc on key teacher training programs as well as programs that make school more accessible to children with special learning needs, such as English learners.

But it is Congress, not the Executive Branch, that possesses the power of the purse. The Constitution does not afford the Executive Branch power to unilaterally refuse to spend appropriations that were passed by both houses of Congress and were signed into law. Yet that is exactly what the Trump Administration is attempting to do here. In today’s lawsuit, Attorney General Bonta and a coalition argue that the Trump Administration’s actions violate federal funding statutes and Appropriations Act, Apportionment, the Administrative Procedures Act and U.S. Constitution, including the separation of powers doctrine, equitable ultra vires, and the Presentment Clause. They asked the Court to declare the funding freeze unlawful – as courts have repeatedly done in other multistate cases – and block any attempts to withhold or delay this funding.

Attorney General Bonta co-leads the coalition together with the attorneys general of Colorado, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island. He is also joined in filing the lawsuit by the attorneys general of Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Vermont, Washinton, and Wisconsin, as well as the states of Kentucky and Pennsylvania.

A copy of the lawsuit is available here. A copy of the motion for a preliminary injunction is available here.