California leads lawsuit over federal conditions on public-safety grants

California is leading a multistate lawsuit challenging federal conditions attached to public-safety and emergency-management grants. The states argue that the Trump administration cannot use the funding to pressure states on elections and immigration enforcement.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta and Gov. Gavin Newsom are identified as leaders of the challenge, which was filed July 23, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island. The defendants include the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

What California is challenging

The complaint targets requirements that states comply with federal policies related to election administration and immigration enforcement to remain eligible for certain grants. It also challenges FEMA‘s asserted authority to terminate funding when states do not meet those conditions.

California’s complaint alleges that up to 20% of Homeland Security Grant Program funding could be withheld under the disputed terms. That figure is an allegation in the court filing, not a court finding or confirmation that money has already been reduced or withheld.

The case remains pending. The reviewed complaint and official announcements do not show that a judge has issued a ruling or injunction as of July 29, 2026.

Why the grants matter in California

California says state and local governments receive about $150 million annually through the Homeland Security Grant Program. That is the state’s stated figure, not an independently verified final appropriation total.

California describes the program as supporting emergency-preparedness activities such as communications, cybersecurity, equipment purchases, training, specialized response teams and emergency planning. FEMA’s preparedness-grants materials describe the program as supporting state, local, tribal and territorial efforts to prepare for terrorism and other hazards.

California’s Office of Emergency Services identifies the grants as part of the state’s broader homeland-security and emergency-management system. The legal dispute therefore concerns grant eligibility and federal funding authority, not a confirmed cancellation of California emergency programs or an established statewide service interruption.

The practical exposure could vary among counties, cities and public agencies depending on which grants they receive and how federal officials apply the disputed conditions. The current sources do not establish that every California jurisdiction faces the same risk or that any particular local program has already lost money.

What the lawsuit seeks

California and the other states are asking the court to declare the grant conditions unlawful and block federal officials from enforcing them. Those are requested remedies in the complaint, not relief the court has granted.

The Associated Press reported on the broader multistate challenge involving FEMA and Homeland Security grant requirements, including the dispute over election-related conditions. The case places emergency-preparedness funding inside a wider fight over the limits of federal spending conditions and executive-branch authority.

What to watch next

The next significant development will be a court order addressing the challenged conditions, including any request for an injunction. California agencies and local governments will also be watching for federal guidance or funding decisions that clarify whether applications, awards or existing grants are affected while the case proceeds.

Sources

• California Attorney General lawsuit announcement
• California Governor's Office announcement
• Associated Press: multistate lawsuit over FEMA and DHS grant conditions
• FEMA FY 2024 Preparedness Grants Manual