Pierce County sues Trump administration over ‘coercive’ grant requirements
Pierce County is one of several local governments filing a lawsuit against the Trump administration over new requirements tied to federal grant funding.
“This Administration is placing new terms and conditions on local governments that are unlawful and coercive,” Pierce County Executive Ryan Mello said in a statement. “Our departments and community partners want to provide people [with] safe housing and services. These contracts are designed to coerce our participation in extreme political agendas.”
Pierce County’s homelessness response relies heavily on federal funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Last year HUD announced Pierce County would receive more than $4.9 million to renew or continue 10 different housing and homeless programs through 2025.
Pierce County Human Services spokesperson Kari Moore told The News Tribune the grant award ensures housing and support services for “hundreds of very vulnerable people.”
She said the Trump administration has tied requirements onto HUD-funded contracts, posing “significant risk and harm” to both the county and service providers.
Moore said the requirements are related to immigration, “gender ideology,” Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, as well as abortion care.
On May 2, a coalition of eight local governments, including King County and Pierce County, filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington against the Trump administration’s HUD and the Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration.
According to the legal complaint, the administration’s grant requirements outline that no “local government that receives funding under this grant may use that funding in a manner that by design or effect facilitates the subsidization or promotion of illegal immigration or abets policies that seek to shield illegal aliens from deportation.”
The lawsuit also notes orders signed from the administration which seek to “ensure grant funds do not promote gender ideology,” and to prevent any programs which “promote DEI.”
The plaintiffs claim terms such as “gender ideology” and DEI are over-broad and too difficult to define. They also argue enforcing the requirements would put them at risk of violating anti-discrimination laws.
“For example, if King County agreed to the administration’s demands to eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion practices, any violation of the federal terms could make the county liable to the federal government for three times the amount of the grant — further endangering critical services for county residents,” King County said in a statement regarding the lawsuit.
Moore said the grant requirements are unlike any Pierce County has seen in other federal contracts.
“They are too broad, vague and risky,” she told The News Tribune. “It’s common for contracts to include restrictions on how organizations can use grant funds, but these new requirements restrict activities of the entire organization or program.”
She also said requirements such as ones that prohibit funds from being used in a matter that supports “sanctuary” policies that protect undocumented immigrants directly conflict with state laws.
Moore said Washington’s Keep Washington Working Act (KWW) limits local law enforcement’s role in immigration enforcement, but one of the administration’s executive order demands local cooperation with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. KWW prohibits such cooperation without a judicial warrant, directly opposing the order.
The lawsuit states that new funding stipulations added by the heads of federal agencies are unconstitutional and an overreach by the executive branch, which does not have the authority to change federal grant conditions without Congress’ explicit approval.
Other local governments that joined in filing the legal complaint include the cities of New York, Boston and San Francisco.
The coalition of local governments also filed for a temporary restraining order on May 5 that, if granted, would block HUD and the FTA from imposing or enforcing the unauthorized grant conditions. The filers anticipate a court ruling by the end of the week.
