Letitia James Slaps Trump With Suit Over ‘Shakedown’ FEMA Cash for New York First Responders

New York Attorney General Letitia James is trying to stop the Trump administration from turning FEMA money for bomb squads, firefighters and disaster planning into leverage over state elections and immigration policy. The lawsuit puts roughly $250 million in annual FEMA grants received by New York in the middle of a broader fight over who gets to set the rules for public safety — and who gets to call the shots at the ballot box.

James joined 23 other attorneys general and the governors of Kentucky and Pennsylvania in suing the administration in federal court, according to the New York AG’s office. The coalition says new FEMA conditions would pressure states to change election procedures, assist federal immigration enforcement and accept vague terms that could let the agency cut off funding whenever it decides a grant no longer serves the so-called national interest.

James highlighted the case again Tuesday, warning that public-safety funding should not become a political bargaining chip.

What FEMA money is at stake

The lawsuit’s complaint says the plaintiff states have been allocated more than $740 million through the fiscal year 2026 Homeland Security Grant Program, with at least $148 million potentially held back over the election-related demands. The grants help pay for first-responder training, cybersecurity, bomb squads, mutual-aid networks and other emergency-preparedness work, according to the court filing.

New York’s portion has a particularly local footprint: The state says nearly $60 million in Homeland Security Grant Program money supports HazMat teams, bomb squads, cybersecurity and law-enforcement activities, while another $142 million supports emergency planning and response. The broader FEMA funding stream also backs disaster mitigation and infrastructure projects, making the dispute about more than election administration on paper.

The immediate trigger is a new set of conditions attached to federal security grants. As reported by Reuters, states could lose 20% of certain awards unless they use a federal citizenship-verification system, move toward hand-marked paper ballots and conduct manual audits of at least 5% of ballots. An earlier FEMA election-funding fight detailed how those requirements were arriving just months before the 2026 midterm elections.

Why James says the conditions are illegal

The coalition argues that Congress never gave DHS or FEMA authority to rewrite state election law, require states to assist federal civil immigration enforcement or terminate grants at will. The complaint says the conditions violate the Administrative Procedure Act and the Constitution’s Spending Clause because they impose sweeping new demands through executive-branch funding decisions.

The states are asking the Rhode Island federal court to declare the conditions unlawful and block the administration from implementing or enforcing them. The case also revives a recurring argument from James and other Democratic attorneys general: Federal dollars appropriated for emergency readiness cannot be used as a shortcut to force states into policies Congress did not enact.

The administration says the requirements are about election integrity, not political retaliation. A FEMA spokesperson called the lawsuit “partisan pushback” and said the agency expected critics to oppose what it described as common-sense measures, according to The Associated Press.

The new case follows several earlier court fights over FEMA and DHS funding conditions, including challenges that James’s office says have already blocked immigration-related strings and broader funding cuts. For New York, the stakes are practical as well as constitutional: The state is asking the court to keep the money flowing to the teams and systems residents expect to be there when the next disaster, cyberattack or major emergency arrives.