A US judge has barred the Trump administration from requiring changes to election administration as a condition for local governments to receive counterterrorism funds.
The decision came in a case filed by local governments contesting the Department of Homeland Security’s effort to attach election-related conditions to funding provided through the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Homeland Security Grant Program.
The matter, Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, Tennessee, et al. v. US Department of Homeland Security, et al., is being heard by US Judge Amir H. Ali in the US District Court for the District of Columbia. Law360 reported that governments in Tennessee, Texas, and Ohio had requested a ruling in their favor, contending that Congress had not tied counterterrorism grants to how localities run their elections.
The US Homeland Security Grant Program delivers federal funding to state and local governments so they can prevent, guard against, and respond to terrorism and other security threats.
As stated in the complaint filed by the local governments, Congress established the program “to help state and local governments prevent, protect against, and respond to terrorism.”
The complaint noted that the program’s funding followed a statutory formula tied to each jurisdiction’s vulnerability to terrorist attacks.
“Congress did not create the HSGP to empower the federal government to control state and local election procedures,” the complaint said.
The dispute emerged after FEMA tied five election-related conditions to fiscal year 2026 funding provided under the program.
As stated in the complaint, those conditions addressed voting equipment and the methods voters use to cast their ballots, post-election audits, ballot reconciliation, citizenship checks of voter rolls, and citizenship checks of election workers.
The funding rules obligated jurisdictions to submit plans for shifting away from electronic voting systems that tally votes using bar codes or QR codes and moving toward equipment that accepts hand-marked paper ballots.
They also had to show compliance with a five percent post-election manual audit, match the number of voters who took part in federal elections to the number of ballots cast, and rely on the Department of Homeland Security’s Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements, or SAVE, to confirm the citizenship of individuals listed in state voter-registration databases.
The conditions further required verifying the citizenship of those working at polling places or running election systems. According to the federal funding notice, election officials are required to use SAVE or another authorized government system to carry out those checks.
The local governments stated that FEMA would hold back 20 percent of each state’s Homeland Security Grant Program award until the election-related conditions were satisfied.
“FEMA will now hold 20 percent of every state’s HSGP award hostage more than $200 million nationwide unless states agree to these and other election conditions,” the complaint said.
The dispute emerged after FEMA tied five election-related conditions to fiscal year 2026 funding provided under the program.
As stated in the complaint, those conditions addressed voting equipment and the methods voters use to cast their ballots, post-election audits, ballot reconciliation, citizenship checks of voter rolls, and citizenship checks of election workers.
The funding rules obligated jurisdictions to submit plans for shifting away from electronic voting systems that tally votes using bar codes or QR codes and moving toward equipment that accepts hand-marked paper ballots.
They also had to show compliance with a five percent post-election manual audit, match the number of voters who took part in federal elections to the number of ballots cast, and rely on the Department of Homeland Security’s Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements, or SAVE, to confirm the citizenship of individuals listed in state voter-registration databases.
The conditions further required verifying the citizenship of those working at polling places or running election systems.
According to the federal funding notice, election officials are required to use SAVE or another authorized government system to carry out those checks.
The local governments stated that FEMA would hold back 20 percent of each state’s Homeland Security Grant Program award until the election-related conditions were satisfied.
The complaint said, “FEMA has no authority to impose those conditions—not under its governing statute and not under the Constitution.”
It added, “Congress authorized FEMA to help jurisdictions protect critical infrastructure from terrorist and cyberattacks. It did not authorize FEMA to decide who may vote, how ballots must be counted, or how states maintain their voter rolls.”
The lawsuit was originally filed on Aug. 17 by Nashville, Tennessee; Harris County, Texas; El Paso County, Texas; and Columbus, Ohio.
According to the Public Rights Project, which is involved in the litigation, Dallas County and Travis County, Texas, joined the case at a later point.
Law360 reported on Sept. 2 that the governments had requested a ruling in their favor from the D.C. federal court, contending that Congress did not condition the receipt of counterterrorism grants on the administration of local elections.
The local governments’ challenge came after FEMA announced it would withhold 20 per cent of Homeland Security Grant Program funding unless recipients met the five election-related requirements.
In August, The Texas Tribune reported that the requirements included moving from voting machines that accept QR and bar codes to equipment using paper ballots, manual ballot audits, and use of the SAVE system for voter-registration checks.
This case is among several legal disputes concerning the Trump administration’s attempts to impose election-related requirements through federal programs.
The Brennan Center for Justice stated that the lawsuit claims the conditions breach the separation of powers, federalism, and the Constitution’s Spending Clause, as well as the Administrative Procedure Act.
The judge’s Monday ruling stops the administration from tying the counterterrorism funding to the challenged election-administration changes while the litigation is ongoing.
