By The Herald Editorial Board
By any measure, efforts to address the homelessness problem experienced throughout Snohomish County remain a work in progress, yet that progress is being made with every individual and family who is placed in housing or whose existing housing is better secured through a range of programs administered by the county and its cities.
A move by the Trump administration, however, now threatens to block one of the critical sources of federal funding used for the supportive housing that provides rapid rehousing and rental assistance and supportive services for young adults, veterans, people with disabilities and survivors of domestic violence.
Local governments across the county that had qualified for federal grant programs — Continuum of Care grants through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development; and public transit grants through the Federal Transit Administration — were informed that this year’s funding would now have to comply with the terms of executive orders that President Trump had signed in the opening weeks of his second term, specifically related to immigration status, abortion and reproductive care, “gender ideology” and DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) programs.
Snohomish County is among those that had qualified for Continuum of Care grants, and it also one of eight local governments across the country who now are suing the Trump administration over the potential loss of funding’ and further loss of even more money if a grant applicant fails to adhere to new contract conditions imposed by the agency and administration.
Snohomish County in a joint program with the City of Everett uses its Continuum of Care grants to support permanent supportive housing and rapid rehousing programs that serve victims of domestic violence, veterans, families, tribal programs and other work with nonprofit agencies in the county.
As reported by The Herald’s Jenna Peterson this weekend, Snohomish County has joined in a lawsuit with seven other local governments: King and Pierce counties in this state, California’s Santa Clara County and the cities of New York, Boston, San Francisco and Columbus, Ohio, arguing the Trump administration is attempting to impose unlawful, vague and potentially costly conditions on grant funding already awarded, using authority the administration doesn’t hold.
In essence, Snohomish County — with $16.7 million in funding allocated for this year — and the other local governments are being told, after the grants had already been awarded, that their receipt of that funding is conditional on meeting the requirements of the president’s various executive orders.
The lawsuit holds that any such change to the contracts that do not pertain to the grants’ explicit purposes cannot be made through executive order, but can only be made by Congress, which holds the “power of the purse,” outlined in Article 1 of the Constitution.
Along with failing to recognize “bedrock” principles of the separation of powers, the new requirements violate several other constitutional and statutory protections, including the 10th Amendment’s anti-commandeering principle, the Fifth Amendment’s rejection of vagueness and the Administrative Procedures Act.
Following the new requirements could potentially put the governments in violation of federal nondiscrimination laws. For example, the “gender ideology” conditions could be found to violate HUD’s own regulations that require equal access to Continuum of Care programs if service is refused to transgender, intersex or gender diverse people, according to reporting by Courthouse News Service. Following the new conditions could open governments to lawsuits by those denied services.
The lawsuit also claims it unreasonable to ask the governments to interpret terms in the executive orders it says are undefined, calling “gender ideology” idiosyncratic and unscientific and noting that the definition of “DEI” in Trump’s orders is vague and inconsistent with federal law.
“Subsequent executive agency memoranda and letters make clear that the Trump administration’s conception of what federal antidiscrimination law requires, including what constitutes a purportedly ‘illegal’ DEI program, is inconsistent with the requirements of federal nondiscrimination statutes as interpreted by the courts,” the plaintiffs write.
That’s left those governments with a choice that really isn’t one: return the funds or agree to the terms, leaving those counties and cities open to lawsuits challenging the administrations’ new rules and how the local governments have applied those rules and denied a taxpayer-supported service to some.
Neither option is acceptable, said County Executive Dave Somers, in a statement issued Friday, finding the requirement in conflict with the county’s values of good government.
“We are dedicated to upholding the law and to meeting the needs of Snohomish County residents,” Somers said. “We cannot, legally or ethically, agree to these new contract stipulations. A legal challenge is our only reasonable path forward to preserve crucial programs and resources for the public we serve.”
There is much that is all too familiar in the lawsuit.
In just its first 100 days or so, more than 225 such lawsuits have been filed against the Trump administration over its executive orders, the pause or cancellation of funding, layoffs and firings, gutting of agencies and other actions. Much of it challenges actions that have been taken hastily and with little notice, without respect for constitutional rules, without consultation of those affected and without concern for consequences, costs and harm.
If most Republicans in Congress, as they appear, are unconcerned for Trump’s usurpation of that body’s authority, then it’s essential for constituents, organizations and state and local governments to challenge the administration in court.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
