Listen to the article
A federal judge in Massachusetts has ordered the Trump administration to reinstate billions of dollars in canceled disaster mitigation funding through the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), delivering a significant victory to 22 states and the District of Columbia that challenged the decision.
Judge Richard G. Stearns ruled Thursday that FEMA’s cancellation of the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program was unlawful, as Congress had specifically appropriated the money for these grants. The judge emphasized that “the BRIC program is designed to protect against natural disasters and save lives,” noting an “inherent public interest in ensuring that the government follows the law.”
The Trump administration announced in April it was terminating the BRIC program, characterizing it as “wasteful and ineffective.” Officials moved to halt $3.6 billion in already-awarded funding that had not yet been distributed and canceled plans to award an additional $882 million in grants for the following fiscal year.
This abrupt decision disrupted projects across hundreds of communities in both Republican and Democratic-led states. Many localities had been planning critical infrastructure improvements, including enhanced stormwater drainage systems, reinforced electrical lines, and relocation assistance for households in disaster-prone areas.
When contacted by The Associated Press, a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson contested the characterization that the program had been terminated, stating that DHS “has not terminated BRIC,” though they did not clarify the program’s current status. The spokesperson criticized the Biden administration’s management of the program, claiming it had “abandoned true mitigation and used BRIC as a green new deal slush fund.”
The court order comes amid significant uncertainty regarding FEMA’s future. On the same day as the ruling, a scheduled meeting of the FEMA Review Council was unexpectedly canceled by the White House, according to an anonymous White House official. The meeting had been set to present recommendations for reforming the agency.
BRIC was initially established during Trump’s first term, funded by Congress through the 2018 Disaster Recovery Reform Act and officially launched by FEMA in 2020. The 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act provided an additional $1 billion for the program over five years, though FEMA had only distributed about $133 million to communities by April this year.
Despite criticism that the program’s complicated application process and cost-sharing requirements made it difficult for rural and less wealthy communities to access, BRIC has received bipartisan support. Republican Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana openly opposed the cancellations, arguing on the Senate floor that the program “protects families and saves taxpayer dollars in the long-run. That’s efficient in my book.”
The funding cancellation was part of a broader effort by the Trump administration to reduce disaster preparedness spending across multiple FEMA programs, reflecting its stated goal of transferring more disaster response responsibility to individual states. Since February, the administration has not approved any requests for hazard mitigation funding, which typically helps states, tribes, and territories implement resilience projects following major disasters.
Further complicating emergency management efforts nationwide, emergency preparedness grants that state and local governments rely on to staff emergency management agencies and purchase equipment are currently frozen. This follows a lawsuit by 12 states challenging unprecedented grant stipulations related to the administration’s immigration agenda.
The economic case for disaster preparedness is compelling. A 2024 study funded by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce found that every dollar invested in disaster preparation saves approximately $13 in economic impact, damage, and cleanup costs.
The court’s decision represents a significant setback to the Trump administration’s disaster management policies and provides immediate relief to communities that had been counting on these funds to protect their infrastructure and residents from increasingly severe climate-related disasters.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
9 Comments
While I’m glad the judge ruled in favor of restoring the BRIC program funding, I’m concerned about the broader implications of the administration’s attempts to cancel it. This seems to be part of a pattern of undermining critical environmental and disaster preparedness efforts. We need strong, evidence-based policies to keep communities safe.
Absolutely. The administration’s disregard for science and public safety is extremely troubling. Decisions like this one on BRIC funding should be based on the merits of the program, not political agendas. I hope this ruling sends a clear message that the courts will not tolerate such blatant overreach.
This seems like a clear-cut case of the administration overstepping its authority. Congress appropriated these funds specifically for disaster mitigation, so FEMA shouldn’t have been able to cancel the program unilaterally. Glad the judge is upholding the rule of law here.
Agreed. The administration’s move to cancel the funding was likely politically motivated rather than based on the merits of the program. It’s good to see the courts stepping in to protect funding that’s critical for protecting communities.
This is an important victory for disaster preparedness and community resilience. The BRIC program seems well-designed to help local governments and residents take proactive steps to mitigate the impacts of natural disasters. I’m glad the judge recognized the public interest in ensuring the program is properly funded and implemented.
I’m curious to learn more about the reasoning behind the Trump administration’s decision to terminate this program. Were there specific concerns about its effectiveness or efficiency? Or was it more of a political move? Either way, I’m glad the judge has ordered them to restore the funding.
Glad to see the judge rule that FEMA must reinstate the disaster mitigation funding. Protecting communities from natural disasters is crucial, and this program seems well-designed to do that. Hopefully the funds can be distributed quickly to support important projects.
It’s great to see the judge order FEMA to restore this important disaster mitigation funding. Protecting lives and infrastructure from natural disasters should be a top priority, especially as the impacts of climate change become more severe. Hopefully this sets a precedent for other challenges to the administration’s attempts to undermine environmental and public safety programs.
This is a positive step, but it’s concerning that the Trump administration tried to cancel the BRIC program without legal justification. Disaster mitigation is essential for public safety, and local communities were counting on this funding. Glad the judge recognized the public interest here.