Attorney General Mayes Files Lawsuit Challenging Unlawful Conditions on Federal Counterterrorism Funding

PHOENIX – Attorney General Kris Mayes joined a coalition of 26 states to stop the Trump administration's continued efforts to use federal funds—specifically, billions of dollars in federal counterterrorism and other funds—to coerce states into complying with the administration's political and policy priorities.

Mayes and the coalition's lawsuit filed today challenges decisions by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to impose unlawful conditions on billions of dollars in federal funds that Congress appropriated for states to use in preparing for and responding to emergencies and natural disasters, including acts of terrorism. The conditions challenged in the lawsuit would require the states to change the way they conduct elections, including by transmitting lists of all registered voters to DHS, and to assist DHS in enforcing federal immigration law. They would also permit DHS to terminate any federal grant at any time and for any reason.

"Congress appropriated these funds to help protect our communities from terrorism, cyberattacks, and natural disasters—not to give the federal government leverage to force states to adopt unrelated political agendas," said Attorney General Kris Mayes. "The Trump administration cannot hold Arizona's public safety funding hostage to coerce states into changing their election laws or diverting law enforcement resources away from the work that keeps our communities safe. We have successfully challenged these unlawful funding conditions before, and we are now going back to court to ensure Arizona receives the critical resources Congress intended and to defend the constitutional limits on federal power."

Mayes joined two similar and successful lawsuits in 2025, each in the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island, challenging DHS's efforts to condition billions in federal emergency funding on states' agreement to enforce federal immigration law and DHS's subsequent attempt to unlawfully reallocate federal homeland security funding away from jurisdictions it viewed as insufficiently supportive of the President's political agenda.

Now, DHS and FEMA have established grant conditions for 2026 funding that again attempt to coerce the states into complying with the administration's policy priorities. The conditions in total affect billions of dollars in funding, including over a billion dollars in Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP) funding that states use to support security measures and protect residents from terrorism, cyberattacks and more. 

First, DHS and FEMA have again threatened to impose the same immigration conditions that they attempted to impose in 2025 on all federal grant programs. The conditions would require states to devote scarce law-enforcement resources to assisting DHS in enforcing federal immigration law. These conditions were found to be unlawful and were enjoined by a district judge last year.

Second, DHS and FEMA threaten to withhold 20% of each state's counterterrorism funding if states do not change state election law to conform to the administration's policy goals. The attorneys general assert that these requirements would force states to abandon years of work and millions of dollars of investments in their elections systems, all to obtain unrelated funding that Congress earmarked for the prevention of terrorist attacks.

Specifically, the challenged funding conditions would require states to transition to paper-ballot systems, conduct a mandatory 5% manual audit of voting systems, reconcile voters and ballots using a methodology DHS has not disclosed, and use DHS's Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) system to verify the citizenship of every election worker and every registered voter in state's voter databases. If states do not comply, DHS and FEMA will withhold at least 20% of each state's HSGP funding.

Finally, the challenged funding conditions unlawfully claim effectively unfettered power to terminate these grants on a whim. The agencies are attempting to add a condition that would allow FEMA to terminate any grant program for any reason. This constant threat of termination undermines the stability and reliability that these critical programs rely on to be effective. Indeed, a federal court recently rejected the Trump administration's attempts to interpret an existing regulation to have that effect.

The attorneys general argue in today's lawsuit that the grant conditions violate the Administrative Procedure Act and the U.S. Constitution's Spending Clause.

Joining Attorney General Mayes in filing the lawsuit are attorneys general of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin, as well as the governors of Kentucky and Pennsylvania.

A copy of the complaint is available here.