A federal judge has halted a Trump administration push that sought to tie billions in disaster and emergency aid to states’ willingness to enforce federal immigration policies.
The ruling came from U.S. District Judge William Smith in Providence, Rhode Island, who sided with 20 states and the District of Columbia after they challenged conditions imposed by the Department of Homeland Security. The states argued that lifesaving funds for disaster response were being used as leverage to force them into adopting the White House’s hardline immigration stance.
Smith’s decision was blunt: attaching sweeping immigration mandates to every grant was unconstitutional. He wrote that denying aid if states refused to comply with vague federal requirements left them with “no meaningful choice”—especially as those funds are critical for disaster preparedness and recovery.
The Department of Homeland Security had defended the policy, saying it had the responsibility to enforce immigration laws and that federal dollars shouldn’t flow to jurisdictions that limit cooperation with immigration authorities. A spokesperson doubled down after the ruling, arguing that states blocking arrests of undocumented immigrants shouldn’t expect taxpayer-funded relief.
But for states like New York, the victory was celebrated as protection against what they called an attempt to hold emergency relief hostage. The decision adds to a string of court setbacks for the administration’s strategy of tying unrelated federal funding to immigration enforcement.
Even after the administration said it would narrow the scope of the restrictions, Judge Smith noted the rules had never been formally withdrawn. That left states, he wrote, with a stark choice: “either certify compliance with contested federal immigration policies or risk losing critical emergency and disaster-relief funding.”
