20 states have sued the U.S government to challenge the legality and constitutionality of new immigration-related conditions that the federal government (via DHS and FEMA) has attached to $3 billion in annual grant for federal emergency preparedness and disaster relief grants. The Defendant is not Trump but DHS and FEMA,

In March and April, DHS and FEMA introduced new “Standard Terms and Conditions” for all federal emergency grants. These include “Civil Immigration Conditions”, which require states to:

• Divert state and local law enforcement resources to cooperate with federal civil immigration enforcement, beyond what state law currently requires or permits;
• Cease any programs that, in DHS’s view, “benefit illegal immigrants or incentivize illegal immigration”, including possibly sanctuary policies or services to undocumented individuals.

The states argue that these conditions are unauthorized by Congress. They coerce states into adopting federal immigration policy, violating the Spending Clause of the Constitution.

If DHS’s new conditions are upheld, states could lose access to this critical funding unless they comply with controversial federal immigration enforcement measures. In short, the federal government is demanding that states use their local resources to help enforce immigration laws, under threat of losing disaster and emergency funds. The states argue this is unconstitutional coercion.