20 States Sue FEMA Over Canceled Disaster Grants/ Newslooks/ WASHINGTON/ J. Mansour/ Morning Edition/ Twenty Democratic-led states have filed a federal lawsuit against FEMA, challenging the abrupt termination of the BRIC disaster-prevention grant program. The suit alleges the Trump administration violated federal law and overstepped executive authority. Communities nationwide now face heightened risk with canceled or unfunded projects.
FEMA Lawsuit & Disaster Readiness: Quick Looks
- Lawsuit Filed: 20 Democratic-led states sued FEMA in Massachusetts federal court.
- Program Cut: FEMA ended the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) grant program.
- Purpose of BRIC: Funded flood levees, tornado shelters, fire breaks, and earthquake-proofing.
- State Impact: Projects in North Carolina, Texas, and beyond halted or defunded.
- Legal Basis: States argue FEMA violated Congress’ will and acted without proper leadership.
- Trump Admin’s Justification: Called BRIC “wasteful,” citing political misuse over effectiveness.
- Federal Law Conflict: Biden-era infrastructure law mandates at least $200M in BRIC funds yearly through 2026.
- Real-World Impact: Towns like Hillsborough and Mount Pleasant lost millions in mitigation funds.
- Political Fallout: Bipartisan outrage grows in disaster-prone areas now left vulnerable.
- Congressional Oversight: Lawmakers may probe FEMA’s program termination amid climate-driven disasters.
20 States Sue FEMA Over Canceled Disaster Grants
Deep Look
WASHINGTON — A coalition of 20 Democratic-led states launched a federal lawsuit Wednesday against the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), accusing the Trump administration of illegally canceling a vital disaster mitigation grant program just as extreme weather becomes increasingly destructive across the United States.
The lawsuit, filed in Massachusetts federal court, argues that FEMA acted outside its authority when it abruptly eliminated the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program—an initiative that has long provided federal grants to bolster local infrastructure against natural disasters such as floods, wildfires, hurricanes, and earthquakes.
Legal Claims and Political Stakes
The states contend the Trump administration’s move violated the U.S. Constitution’s separation of powers, claiming that Congress never authorized the program’s elimination, particularly after allocating billions to it under President Joe Biden’s infrastructure law.
Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell, who is leading the lawsuit, said:
“By abruptly and unlawfully shutting down the BRIC program, this administration is abandoning states and local communities that rely on federal funding to protect their residents and, in the event of disaster, save lives.”
FEMA, under fire for acting without a Senate-confirmed administrator, has yet to issue a formal response but previously dismissed BRIC as “wasteful and ineffective,” claiming it favored political agendas over actual preparedness.
The Role of BRIC
Created under a 2000 federal law and later strengthened through bipartisan legislation—including a funding boost in Trump’s own first term—the BRIC program has funded thousands of local mitigation efforts, from floodplain relocations to firebreaks and stormwater improvements.
Biden’s 2021 infrastructure law mandates FEMA make available at least $200 million annually for such projects through 2026—a requirement the lawsuit says the administration is now flouting.
On-the-Ground Fallout
The impact of FEMA’s reversal is already being felt in towns across the country:
- Hillsborough, NC had secured nearly $7 million to relocate a flood-prone wastewater pumping station. But before work began, Tropical Storm Chantal struck, damaging the system and forcing it offline.
- Mount Pleasant, NC, was depending on $4 million to upgrade outdated stormwater systems and electrical infrastructure to protect a historic theater and nearby businesses. Now, the assistant town manager, Erin Burris, says the entire plan is in limbo:
“I’ve got engineering plans ready to go and I don’t have the money to do it.”
Even in Trump-friendly districts, anger is brewing as towns feel blindsided by the funding loss.
Federal Pushback and Response
White House spokesperson Kush Desai defended the program’s termination, pointing to recent FEMA audits and claiming that BRIC had become politicized and inefficient. The administration says its focus is on streamlining federal disaster response and ensuring that funding serves direct needs, not “bureaucratic delays.”
Still, critics argue this abrupt shift leaves towns dangerously unprepared, especially as climate change accelerates the frequency and intensity of natural disasters.
Broader Implications
The termination of BRIC isn’t just about canceled funding. It upends long-term local planning, invalidates community engineering projects, and strains local budgets already stretched thin.
Moreover, the lawsuit notes FEMA has been under the direction of an acting administrator lacking Senate confirmation, raising questions about the legality of agency decisions made under this interim leadership.
Climate Realities Collide With Politics
The FEMA dispute comes as the U.S. faces record-setting wildfires, floods, and hurricanes, underscoring the importance of preparedness infrastructure.
Congressional oversight is expected, and some lawmakers are calling for hearings on the potential misuse of executive authority and the impact of BRIC’s cancellation on vulnerable communities.
You must Register or Login to post a comment.