Judges have now ruled three times against similar HUD moves
A federal judge on Friday blocked the Trump administration’s latest attempt to change how the Department of Housing and Urban Development funds programs that combat homelessness. U.S. District Judge Mary McElroy said the government issued its latest notice of funding opportunity in a “procedurally invalid manner,” according to Politico.
The decision marked the third time federal judges have ruled against similar moves by HUD, according to the reporting on the case.
At issue is the Continuum of Care program, which provides $4 billion in funds to local organizations serving individuals experiencing homelessness. HUD Secretary Scott Turner has criticized the program for prioritizing permanent housing solutions that apply the Housing First model, in which individuals are housed without preconditions, and has sought to shift funding toward temporary housing and services instead.
“Our philosophy for addressing the homelessness crisis will now define success not by dollars spent or housing units filled, but by how many people achieve long-term self-sufficiency and recovery,” Turner has previously said. “We are stopping the Biden-era slush fund that fueled the homelessness crisis, shut out faith-based providers simply because of their values, and incentivized never-ending government dependency.”
Mary Frances Kenion, chief equity officer for the National Alliance to End Homelessness, told Politico the repeated court outcomes point to a broader pattern. “This isn’t the first time we have gone to court over an unlawful [notice of funding opportunity],” Kenion said. “And what that tells us is that [HUD has] a pattern of not following the law, just based on the decisions that have been handed down by the court to date.”
New York Attorney General Letitia James, one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, said the Continuum of Care funds “help keep some of the most vulnerable in our communities in safe and stable housing.” In a statement, James said the administration “has tried repeatedly to break the law in order to push their political agenda and jeopardize this critical program,” adding that plaintiffs “have once again stood up to enforce the law and halt their cruel agenda, protecting vital housing and other services nationwide.”