The Chicago Housing Authority is suing President Donald Trump’s administration over new requirements targeting “diversity” that threaten at least 13% of the agency’s annual budget for now — and possibly millions more in the near future.
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development recently began requiring its grant recipients to certify that none of the funds will be used for “diversity, equity and inclusion mandates, policies or programs,” or for programs and initiatives related to gender ideology, elective abortions and immigration.
The federal lawsuit filed by the CHA challenges that new mandate and seeks a temporary restraining order to halt the implementation of the new prerequisites.
HUD’s application for a $185 million operational funding grant is due Oct. 21, but city officials argue they’re unable to apply without more information. The federal agency “provided no additional information or clarification on these requirements” outside quoting recent executive orders, CHA said.
“This lawsuit is intended to secure the future of funding for our 135,000 residents throughout the city of Chicago, including thousands of senior residents and children who rely on us,” CHA Operating Chairman Matthew Brewer said in a statement. “We are asking the court to step in and provide guidance on the lawfulness of the conditions HUD is seeking to impose. This intervention is a necessary last resort since our discussions with HUD have been limited due to the government shutdown.”
HUD didn’t immediately comment, citing the federal government shutdown.
Brewer said agreeing to HUD’s “vague and unclear” terms now could jeopardize not just the upcoming grants for which applications are due next week, but other future funding that will require the same pledge against diversity-related policies.
He said 95% of CHA’s funding — close to $1 billion — comes from HUD, and “if HUD were to impose these conditions on all the funding, then it could be to the magnitude of a billion dollars.”
In the U.S. District Court complaint, CHA says, “The vagueness and overbreadth of HUD’s new conditions … place [CHA] in an untenable position.”
The housing authority also argues the terms demanded by HUD are “constrained by the Constitution” and even contradict some of the federal agency’s own regulations that require consideration of race or sex.
As examples, CHA cites HUD’s Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) rule, which mandates emergency housing plans for tenants who are victims of domestic violence or sexual assault. HUD also has a rule that requires consideration of minority- and women-owned businesses to receive consideration.
Brewer added the appropriation of funds by Congress requires a notice and comment period, and HUD “adding new conditions has bypassed the entire process.”
In a statement, local officials pointed to a recent preliminary injunction in a similar Rhode Island case in which domestic violence and housing advocacy groups sued over similar changes to grant application requirements.
In that case, U.S. District Judge Melissa R. DuBose didn’t mandate the dispersal of funds but temporarily restricted the new federal requirements for grants from moving forward.
The federal court order cited potential violations of the Administrative Procedure Act — which prohibits the federal government from imposing specific conditions on a subset of grants — as well as “irreparable harm” to the groups seeking the funds.
“The Plaintiffs stand between a rock and a hard place, and surely such a high stakes dilemma constitutes irreparable harm in the eyes of this Court,” the judge wrote the Rhode Island case. “Without preliminary relief, the Plaintiffs will face irreparable harm that will disrupt vital services to victims of homelessness and domestic and sexual violence. Defendants will merely need to revert back to considering grant applications and awarding funds as they normally would.”
The threats over housing funding are the latest in a series of attacks by the Trump administration against policies related to diversity, gender and race. Federal agencies have sought to limit K-12 education funding and grants to colleges and universities over similar complaints.