Attorney General Ellison wins lawsuit against Trump Administration over billions in emergency services funding
Court rules Trump Administration violated the Constitution, restores important public safety funds to Minnesota
Ruling marks the significant milestone of winning final judgment and a permanent injunction from the District Court
September 25, 2025 (SAINT PAUL) — Attorney General Ellison today announced an important victory in a multistate lawsuit he and a coalition of other attorneys general filed against the Trump administration over its attempt to illegally coerce states into sweeping immigration enforcement by threatening to withhold billions in federal funding for emergency preparedness and preventing and addressing terrorist attacks, mass shootings, wildfires, floods, cybersecurity threats, and more.
Yesterday afternoon, September 24, U.S. District Court in Rhode Island granted a motion for summary judgement that Attorney General Ellison and 20 attorneys general requested in their May 13, 2025 lawsuit against the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The court held that the agencies violated the Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act by conditioning all federal funds from FEMA and DHS on states’ agreement to assist in enforcing federal immigration law.
In yesterday’s decision, the court agreed that DHS violated the Administrative Procedure Act in adding the conditions, including because the agency failed to consider public safety in doing so and because the conditions are overly broad and ambiguous. The court further found that the conditions violate the Constitution’s Spending Clause. The court rejected DHS’ argument that placing immigration-related conditions on the grant funding was appropriate simply because many of the grants are designed to prevent and respond to acts of terrorism. Instead, the court determined that DHS made no serious attempt to provide a fact-based reason for its action. In fact, the court found that the “vague and confusing language” used in the conditions made it nearly impossible for states to comply.
The state of Minnesota uses funds from FEMA to work with local law enforcement to fight crime, provide incident management support after natural disasters, purchase bomb squad equipment, train first responders, and more. Losing access to that funding would have jeopardized public safety across Minnesota.
"The Trump Administration tried to stop our tax dollars from coming back to Minnesota to fund law enforcement, prepare for natural disasters, and improve public safety. Fortunately, they did not succeed,” said Attorney General Ellison. “Minnesotans would be less safe if our police stepped away from their patrols, investigations, and community-engagement work to instead enforce Trump’s immigration priorities. I am pleased to have successfully blocked this unconstitutional attempt to divert police resources away from the communities they serve, and I will continue to defend the rule of law and protect the rights and safety of Minnesotans everywhere.”
In February, Secretary Noem directed DHS and its sub-agencies, including FEMA, to cease federal funding to jurisdictions that do not assist the federal government in the enforcement of federal immigration law. In March, DHS amended the terms and conditions it places on all federal funds to require recipients to certify that they will assist in enforcing federal immigration law. These sweeping new conditions would require states and state agencies to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement efforts or lose out on billions of federal dollars that states use to protect public safety.
In filing the May lawsuit, Ellison and the coalition argued that the immigration conditions exceed DHS’s legal authority and violate the Constitution because the programs in question were established to help states prepare for, protect against, respond to and recover from catastrophic disasters, not for immigration-related purposes. The district court agreed, holding that imposing the condition on all DHS and FEMA programs, regardless of the purpose of those programs, was unlawful.
Joining Attorney General Ellison in the lawsuit, which was co-led by the attorneys general of California, Illinois, New Jersey, and Rhode Island, were the attorneys general from Colorado, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Washington, Wisconsin, and Vermont.