29 local governments nationwide sue to stop Trump administration’s unlawful and extreme attack on emergency and disaster funding

For immediate release: Oct. 1, 2025

Media contact: Jackie Jena, jackie@publicrightsproject.org

SAN FRANCISCO, CA — 29 local governments and Public Rights Project filed a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s attempt to impose extreme and unrelated conditions on federal emergency and disaster preparedness grants. The conditions would force local governments to adopt the administration’s political agenda or risk losing critical funding. 

The lawsuit, Santa Clara County v. Noem, centers on over $350 million in grants administered by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The DHS and FEMA grants in question support plaintiffs in securing transportation infrastructure, purchasing essential fire department equipment, enhancing port security, preventing terrorism and planning for disaster mitigation. The plaintiffs ask the court to stop DHS and FEMA from using life-saving funds as leverage for unrelated political agendas.

The administration is demanding that local governments participate in its immigration enforcement policies and abandon diversity, equity or inclusion (DEI) initiatives, among other conditions to qualify for funding. The plaintiffs argue that these conditions are unconstitutional and exceed executive authority, falling outside the scope of what Congress authorized. 

“The Trump administration is trying to force governments to abandon policies that keep people safe,” said Jill Habig, founder and CEO of Public Rights Project. “Tying federal safety and security funding to these demands is both coercive and dangerous. These funds are life-saving resources that communities rely on to prepare for and recover from wildfires, earthquakes, terrorism and other crises.”

“For almost 75 years, Congress has been clear that one of the Federal Government’s core functions is to provide resources and support to state and local governments to ensure that they are prepared to respond to emergencies and disasters alike,” said Santa Clara County Counsel Tony LoPresti. “This Federal Administration is now unlawfully changing course, imposing unconstitutional conditions on critical grant funding that helps local governments hire first responders, fund search and rescue operations, retrofit facilities, and train employees in disaster response. Governments shouldn’t have to pass a political litmus test to be able to care for their communities.”

“Emergency management is the backbone of safe and resilient communities, and threatening its funding puts real lives at risk,” said San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu. “This funding means faster emergency response times, stronger regional coordination, and better protection for our residents during disasters and terrorist attacks. The federal government’s politically motivated grant conditions demonstrate both a disregard for our Constitution and the well-being of our residents.”

In Marin County, Calif., roughly 4,000 residents face greater flood risk without the $23 million the county is counting on for mitigation. In Los Angeles, $140 million in federal grants is earmarked for wildfire recovery — rebuilding communities, strengthening water infrastructure and launching a mobile early warning system for evacuations. In Petaluma, Calif., federal funds are critical for protecting seniors in mobile home parks along the Petaluma River, ensuring vulnerable elders aren’t left in floodwaters or wildfire danger. Meanwhile, in Santa Clara County, $3.6 million — nearly 43% of the emergency management budget — is at risk, threatening preparedness for terrorism, disasters and upcoming global events like Super Bowl LX and the 2026 FIFA World Cup.

Local government officials warn that losing these funds will force communities to divert scarce resources from other essential services, delay projects or cancel them entirely. 

Santa Clara County and the city and county of San Francisco are the lead plaintiffs. Public Rights Project is representing the additional plaintiffs. The plaintiffs are: 

• Alameda, Calif.
• Bellingham, Wash.
• Berkeley, Calif.
• City and County of San Francisco, Calif.
• Culver City, Calif.
• King County, Wash.
• Los Angeles, Calif.
• Los Angeles County, Calif.
• Los Angeles County Consolidated Fire Protection District, Calif. 
• Marin County, Calif.
• Oakland, Calif.
• Palo Alto, Calif.
• Pasadena, Calif.
• Petaluma, Calif.
• Pierce County, Wash.
• Sacramento, Calif.
• San Diego, Calif.
• San Diego County, Calif.
• San Jose, Calif.
• San Mateo County, Calif.
• Santa Clara County, Calif.
• Santa Monica, Calif.
• Santa Rosa, Calif.
• Snohomish County, Wash.
• Sonoma County, Calif.
• Sonoma County Community Development Commission, Calif.
• Sonoma County Water Agency, Calif.
• Sonoma Valley County Sanitation District, Calif.
• Tucson, Ariz.

###

About Public Rights Project
As a nonpartisan nonprofit organization, Public Rights Project helps local government officials fight for civil rights. We do this by building their capacity to protect and advance civil rights, convening and connecting them on issues of civil rights, and providing legal representation to governments to help them win in court on behalf of their residents. Since our founding, we’ve built a network of over 1,300 partners, including elected officials and 227 government offices across all 50 states, and helped recover over $46 million in relief for marginalized people. www.publicrightsproject.org