Judge Restores $233M+ In Grants: U.S. District Judge Mary McElroy ruled that DHS unlawfully cut more than $233 million from nine jurisdictions’ Homeland Security grants and ordered the funds restored. The 48-page opinion found the reductions arbitrary and tied to states' refusal to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement. McElroy highlighted the grants’ role in counterterrorism and first-responder preparedness, citing the recent Brown University shooting as an example of why the funds matter.
Federal Judge Orders Restoration Of $233M+ In Homeland Security Grants To Democratic-Led States
A makeshift memorial is seen on the campus of Brown University, close to from the scene of the shooting, Monday, Dec. 15, 2025, in Providence, R.I. (AP Photo/Robert F. Bukaty)
PROVIDENCE, R.I. — A federal judge has ordered the Biden administration’s Department of Homeland Security to restore more than $233 million in Homeland Security grant funding that had been cut from nine jurisdictions after officials appear to have factored state cooperation on immigration enforcement into grant decisions.
U.S. District Judge Mary McElroy issued a 48-page opinion finding the funding reductions arbitrary and capricious and outside the bounds of lawful grant administration. The cuts affected Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington and came from a $1 billion grant program intended to support counterterrorism and first-responder activities, with much of the money typically flowing to local police and fire departments.
The decision was a victory for a coalition of 12 state attorneys general who sued after learning their states faced steep reductions because of their designation as "sanctuary" jurisdictions. McElroy concluded federal officials had placed states' willingness to aid immigration enforcement at issue when deciding whether to slash awards under the Homeland Security Grant Program and related grants.
“What else could defendants’ decisions to cut funding to specific counterterrorism programming by conspicuous round numbered amounts ... be if not arbitrary and capricious?” McElroy wrote, adding that no special legal or mathematical training was required to see the cuts did not reflect any plausible formula.
The Trump-appointed judge ordered DHS to restore the previously announced allocations to the plaintiff states. McElroy emphasized the practical stakes of the grants, noting the program’s role in supporting vital counterterrorism and law-enforcement programs. She pointed to the recent attack at Brown University — in which a gunman killed two students and wounded nine others — as an example of the kind of incident the $1 billion program is intended to help address.
The funding reductions were announced shortly after another federal judge, in a separate case, ruled that conditioning FEMA disaster funding on state cooperation with federal immigration enforcement was unconstitutional. Emails seeking comment were sent to DHS and FEMA.
Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell praised McElroy’s ruling, saying it prevents the federal government from using grant dollars to punish states for policy disagreements and helps ensure funding for lifesaving preparations and emergency response.
What Happens Next: DHS must restore the awards to the affected jurisdictions while legal challenges proceed. The ruling underscores limits on how the federal government may use grant programs to influence state policy.
