Overview
- The suit, filed Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, is led by California AG Rob Bonta and Illinois AG Kwame Raoul with 14 other states and the District of Columbia joining.
- Plaintiffs seek an injunction, alleging Administrative Procedure Act and constitutional violations and warning of decertification, loss of complaint referrals and about $10.7 million in FHAP funding at risk, including roughly $3 million for California.
- HUD’s September 2025 memos prioritize cases with clear intent and, according to the complaint, bar agencies from pursuing disparate-impact claims or being reimbursed for cases involving sexual orientation, gender identity, criminal records, source of income or English-language proficiency.
- The lawsuit also challenges new funding conditions that prohibit using FHAP dollars to “promote” abortion, “promote” illegal immigration or advance what HUD labels “gender ideology.”
- The states cite enforcement staff cuts and policy rollbacks under Secretary Scott Turner, who has moved away from prior transgender protections; Turner criticized the lawsuit in a post on X as he vowed to enforce the Fair Housing Act as written, and plaintiffs say they expect expedited review.