Trump Administration Loses Lawsuit Over Homelessness Funding Rules

Housing advocates protesting outside the HUD headquarters.
Bisnow/Jon Banister
Housing Advocates Protest Outside Hud Headquarters.

A federal judge in Rhode Island ruled against changes the federal government sought to the main source of funding for housing the homeless. The judge made the ruling on the grounds that the government didn’t adequately consider the impact the changes would have on providers or on people who need such agencies to obtain and remain in housing.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development's actions on this front constituted a violation of federal law, U.S. District Judge Mary McElroy said in a ruling issued Monday.

“Overall, the actions undertaken by HUD in attempting to hastily eliminate its Housing First approach serve as the hallmark of unreasoned decision making,” McElroy wrote.

The case was brought by 21 states and the District of Columbia and impacts more than $3B, Bloomberg reported.

Central to the case was a program called Continuum of Care, which provides funding for homelessness housing and prevention programs. Late last year, HUD suddenly outlined a new way to administer the programs. The new guidelines were a dramatic shift from previous years, with no advance warning or extra time to comply. Cities and advocacy organizations sued.

The changes highlighted in the lawsuit included a policy shift that would lower the funding that could be used for permanent housing from 90% to 30%. HUD also sought to move the majority of the funds to temporary transitional housing assistance, prioritizing funding for programs that impose work or service requirements on residents.

HUD has criticized the approach known as housing first, which emphasizes getting homeless people housed before attempting to address other issues, such as addiction or unemployment.

Funding would have been prioritized for cities that enforced public camping bans. HUD also proposed withholding funding from programs that helped “facilitate racial preferences” or “violate the sex binary in humans.”

Although the ruling is a victory for the states and organizations that wanted the changes overturned, it also left the door open for possible attempts to roll out the changes at a later date, as McElroy denied a request from the plaintiffs for a permanent injunction.

Representatives for HUD didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Continue reading this story with a free account

Log in or register
Sign up for more articles like this
Subscribe to Bisnow's National Newsletters
Related Stories

Housing Completions Close To 40,000 As LDA Adds Major Site And CEO Departs

Voorhees Greenlights 178-Unit Office-To-Resi Conversion Amid Multifamily Boom

TPG, ACORE Raise Billions For Opportunistic CRE Funds

Newmark Cuts Earnings Outlook Despite Record Third Quarter

Battered Mortgage REIT Suspends Dividend To Preserve Cash

From Pandemic Darling To Cautionary Tale: Pickleball Clubs Face A Reckoning After Betting Big On Retail Space

Weil Gotshal Wind-Down Leaves 830K SF Hole In America's Office Market

Blackstone Mortgage Trust Reports Unexpected Q3 Net Loss

Tyko Capital Sets New Record For Florida's Largest Construction Loan

Office Recovery Moving Faster Than Expected, CoStar Finds

How Microsoft, Coca-Cola And Amazon Are Adapting Their Offices For AI Age

Hof Wonen Acquires 251 Social Rental Houses In New Mixed-Use Project In The Hague