California Attorney General Rob Bonta has taken a significant step in challenging the actions of the Trump Administration alongside a coalition of 21 attorneys general. Together, they have filed an amicus brief supporting non-profit housing organizations that suffered from the sudden cancellation of Fair Housing Initiatives Program (FHIP) grants by the previous administration. These organizations play a crucial role in combatting housing discrimination, a goal reinforced by Congress since FHIP's establishment in 1988.
On February 27, 78 FHIP grants, totaling around $30 million, were abruptly terminated by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), with no advance notice or substantial justification besides a general statement asserting alignment with new priorities set by President Trump and the Department of Government Efficiency. This decision led to a class-action lawsuit by Massachusetts Fair Housing Center against the administration, representing the affected non-profits.
Attorney General Bonta emphasized, “The termination of these grants was illegal, and they must be reinstated,” expressing concern over the potential closure of non-profit organizations without these funds and the negative impact on efforts to combat housing discrimination.
Following a court order on March 26, 2025, which temporarily reinstated the grants, the decision was later reversed, prompting a renewed request for the restraining order. The amicus brief filed argues that HUD's action would severely disrupt the essential work of these organizations, undermining efforts to address housing discrimination. It highlights a case in California, where evidence from a FHIP organization led to legal action against a property-management company for discriminatory practices.
Attorney General Bonta is supported by his counterparts from New York, Massachusetts, and 18 other states, each stressing the importance of fair housing and the role of non-profits in supporting state initiatives to maintain safe and equitable residential environments.
The attorneys general collectively assert that HUD's determination violated the Administrative Procedure Act by being arbitrary and lacking due consideration for the consequences faced by affected communities.
A copy of the amicus brief is available for public access.