In a decision that will protect funding for proven solutions to homelessness, the First Circuit Court of Appeals today rejected a Trump-Vance administration request to overturn a court order that is currently preventing the administration from implementing unlawful and unreasonable restrictions on that funding. This decision comes in an ongoing case to protect resources for local governments and organizations that fund permanent housing projects for veterans, seniors, people with disabilities, and individuals and families with children experiencing homelessness. Plaintiffs in the case include Crossroads Rhode Island and Youth Pride, Inc.
Among other claims, the lawsuit raises a First Amendment challenge to a new funding condition that threatens to reject any applicant that has used or uses “a definition of sex other than as binary in humans.” The suit also argues that HUD’s new policies are contrary to federal law, and arbitrary and capricious in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. In rejecting the government’s request to issue a stay of the lower court’s decision, the appeals court noted that, “the record paints a disturbing picture of the harms that would flow to the plaintiffs, their constituents, and the public from issuing a stay.”
This case, National Alliance to End Homelessness et al. v. HUD, is a separate lawsuit from the National Alliance to End Homelessness et al. v. Turner, et al., which had a decision on Tuesday, March 31.
For years and through multiple presidential administrations, the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Continuum of Care (CoC) Program has helped provide necessary resources to fund permanent housing projects. On November 13, 2025, however, without explanation, HUD rescinded the two-year notice of funding opportunity (NOFO) that should have governed FY 2025 awards and replaced it with one that threatens existing services, which could push nearly 200,000 Americans into homelessness. HUD then issued yet another new NOFO a month later. The new NOFO for FY 2025 upended the stability of the program required by law, and would have a devastating impact for communities, unhoused and previously unhoused children, youth, adults, and families, and the service providers who rely on federal funding to provide needed help.
A broad coalition of local governments and nonprofit organizations took legal action to stop the new NOFO in National Alliance to End Homelessness et al. v. HUD. In December 2025, a federal judge granted preliminary relief, which temporarily blocks the administration’s attempts to implement the unlawful and unreasonable restrictions that seek to shift funding away from proven solutions to homelessness. Today’s decision maintains that block and confirms that Congress’s recent law requiring HUD to renew existing grants does not mean that HUD may implement the unlawful conditions.
The coalition behind the lawsuit includes the National Alliance to End Homelessness (NAEH), the National Low Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC), Crossroads Rhode Island, Youth Pride, Inc., as well as the County of Santa Clara, Calif., San Francisco, Calif., King County, Wash., Boston, Mass., Cambridge, Mass., Nashville, Tenn., and Tucson, Ariz.
The coalition released the following statement in response to the order:
“As the Trump-Vance administration continues to weaponize federal funding and attempts to hold hostage support for people experiencing homelessness – including families, seniors, veterans, and people with disabilities – we are relieved that the appeals court has left the order we earned late last year in place. We will continue to pursue this case and remain dedicated to protecting proven solutions to homelessness and the hundreds of thousands of people who rely on this vital support.”
Democracy Forward and the ACLU Foundation of Rhode Island represent the coalition of nonprofit organizations in the matter; the National Homelessness Law Center represents NAEH and NLIHC; Public Rights Project represents the cities of Boston, Cambridge, Nashville, and Tucson; and Santa Clara County, King County, and San Francisco represent themselves. The Lawyers’ Committee for Rhode Island represents all plaintiffs.
Plaintiff and co-counsel quotes regarding the original filing are available here.
Read the court’s order here.
