Latest Breaking News

BumRushDaShow

(160,177 posts) Sat Sep 13, 2025, 02:12 PM Saturday

Trump-Appointed Judge Blasts 'Chaos' As She Blocks HUD Policy

Source: Newsweek

Published Sep 13, 2025 at 7:44 AM EDT

A federal judge in Rhode Island on Friday blocked the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) from requiring the recipients of homeless housing grants to adhere to the administration's policies on immigration enforcement and transgender access. Newsweek contacted the HUD for comment on Saturday via email outside of regular office hours.

Why It Matters

Friday's ruling demonstrated that with Republicans controlling the White House and both chambers of Congress, the courts continue to be one of the main impediments of Trump administration policy.

What To Know

On Friday, U.S. District Judge Mary McElroy in Providence, whom President Trump nominated in 2019, imposed a temporary restraining order preventing the HUD from enacting new criteria for the distribution of $75 million toward homeless housing. The new grant application criteria were published by HUD on September 5.

According to the National Alliance to End Homelessness (NAEH) and the Woman's Development Corporation (WDC), which brought the case, the proposed rules would have prevented funding being allocated to so-called "sanctuary" jurisdictions which have laws in place limiting collaboration with federal law enforcement. The new proposed regulations also required applicants to say they "will not deny the sex binary in humans or promote the notion that sex is a chosen or mutable characteristic."

Read more: https://www.newsweek.com/trump-appointed-judge-blasts-chaos-blocks-hud-policy-2129309

1 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Trump-Appointed Judge Blasts 'Chaos' As She Blocks HUD Policy (Original Post) BumRushDaShow Saturday OP

Depending on how the grant money is given moniss Saturday #1

moniss

(8,071 posts)

1. Depending on how the grant money is given

Reply to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Sat Sep 13, 2025, 04:24 PM

Saturday

that could become a legal argument in favor of those non-profits. If the money is coming down through the city and then to the non-profits the idea of the "jurisdiction" as a party to the matter could apply. But if these were direct grants from HUD to these non-profits then the "jurisdiction" argument by HUD should not be allowed in. The city is a "jurisdiction" and not an individual non-profit group. The group has no control over any decisions or policies of the "jurisdiction". So if HUD has a legal or policy squabble with the "jurisdiction" then their avenue is with the legal or political action against the "jurisdiction". Here in this case they appear to be punishing "non-jurisdiction" parties for actions over which they have no control. In other words the government is alleging harm but it is taking action against people who had no role in causing the harm and who could not possibly alleviate that harm.

It would be like refusing to pay your city portion of your taxes because you disagree with some action by a private company that the city had no control over. The city isn't a party to the company so the "attack" on the non-party is improper.

Reply to this discussion