Trump Administration Loses Lawsuit Over Homelessness Funding Rules

Housing advocates protesting outside the HUD headquarters.
Photo credit: 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

Wall Street Impatient For Big Tech Returns On Data Center Spending

As AI Adoption Ramps Up, Half A Million Property Managers Are In The Crosshairs

Treasuries Hover Around 4.7% As Wall Street Questions If Warsh Is A 'Dove In Hawk's Clothing'

Avison Young Had Assets Frozen By Bank Over Unpaid Taxes

Camden Property Trust Sells West Coast Portfolio, Clears $1.5B Target

Churchill Downs Plans To Sell 9 Casinos, Focus On Horse Racing

Bringing Stability And Savings To CRE Insurance Through Working Layer

More Hotel Owners In Need Of Cash Are Getting It From The Big Brands

Former Arms Dealer Targeting Heartland Apartment Takeover Files For Bankruptcy

SEC Charges REIT, Its Founders With Alleged $152M Fraud Scheme

Equinix Ramps Up Spending Plans Amid Faster-Than-Expected AI Shift

Cortland, Pulte, INVH, Walker & Dunlop Execs Talk Changing Demographics, AI