Judge blocks FEMA from tying counterterrorism grants to election mandates
A federal judge ruled that the Trump administration cannot withhold 20% of counterterrorism grants from local governments that refuse to adopt specific election administration changes. Judge Amir Ali determined that FEMA exceeded its authority by linking anti-terrorism funding to routine voting procedures, such as manual ballot audits and citizenship verification. The decision benefits plaintiffs in Texas, Ohio, and Tennessee, marking another judicial setback for federal attempts to influence election rules ahead of the 2026 midterms.
Key points
- Judge Amir Ali ruled that FEMA cannot condition counterterrorism grant funds on changes to election administration.
- The disputed rule required jurisdictions to verify voter citizenship, audit 5% of ballots manually, and use hand-marked ballots.
- The lawsuit was filed by counties in Texas and Tennessee, and the city of Columbus, Ohio.
- The judge stated that FEMA failed to demonstrate how these election changes relate to preventing terrorist attacks.
- The ruling prevents the withholding of tens of millions of dollars in federal funding from the affected jurisdictions.
Background
This decision follows a series of legal battles in 2026 regarding federal interference in elections. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court blocked sweeping mail ballot restrictions, and local officials have been preparing for potential federal interference ahead of the November midterms. The current ruling adds to a pattern of courts blocking administration attempts to seize state authority over voting procedures.
How outlets are covering it
The Washington Post characterized the ruling as a significant blow to the administration's efforts to rewrite election rules. CNBC emphasized the legal reasoning, noting that Judge Ali found FEMA had not explained how the required changes addressed terrorist threats. The Brennan Center for Justice, representing some plaintiffs, argued that the funding conditions were unconstitutional and jeopardized public safety. A DOJ spokesman declined to comment on the ruling, while Harris County, Texas, celebrated the decision as a victory against federal overreach.
Why it matters
The ruling reinforces the legal separation between counterterrorism funding and election administration, preventing the federal government from using financial leverage to impose voting mandates. It protects tens of millions in public safety funds for local jurisdictions and limits the administration's ability to influence the 2026 midterm elections through conditional grants.
What to watch
The Trump administration may appeal the decision or seek alternative legal avenues to influence election administration. Local governments in Texas, Ohio, and Tennessee can now retain the full counterterrorism grants. The administration may continue to pursue other election-related policies through different agencies or legislative means, though this ruling sets a precedent against conditioning unrelated federal funds on voting rules.
- Trump administration cannot tie anti-terrorism grants to election security, judge rules Politico
- FEMA can’t condition security grants on election changes, judge says The Washington Post
- Trump can’t force election changes by blocking counterterrorism funds to states, judge says AP News
- Judge Blocks FEMA From Tying Antiterrorism Grants to Election Changes The New York Times
- Feds can't withhold counterterrorism funds from states to force election admin changes, judge rules CNBC
Want the full story? Read the original reporting
Read on Politico