- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- United States
- /
- Massachusetts
- /
- Washington v. Federal Emergency Management Agency
Washington v. Federal Emergency Management Agency
Geography
Date
2025
Document type
Litigation
Part of
About this case
Filing year
2025
Status
Memorandum filed by plaintiffs in support of motion for summary judgment.
Geography
Docket number
1:25-cv-12006
Court/admin entity
United States → United States Federal Courts → United States District of Massachusetts (D. Mass.)
Case category
Constitutional Claims → Other Constitutional ClaimsFederal Statutory Claims → Other Statutes and Regulations
Principal law
United States → 42 U.S.C. § 5133 (Predisaster hazard mitigation)United States → Administrative Procedure Act (APA)United States → Appointments ClauseUnited States → Appropriations ClauseUnited States → Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000United States → Disaster Recovery Reform Act of 2018 (DRRA)United States → Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)United States → Spending Clause
At issue
Challlenge brought by 20 states to the termination of the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) pre-disaster mitigation program, which states used for climate resilience projects, and the repurposing of BRIC funds.
Documents
Filing Date
Type
Action Taken
Summary
Document
10/15/2025
Motion For Summary Judgment
Memorandum filed by plaintiffs in support of motion for summary judgment.
–
08/05/2025
Decision
Motion for preliminary injunction allowed.
The federal district court for the District of Massachusetts granted plaintiff states’ motion for a preliminary injunction barring the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and other federal defendants from spending funds allocated to the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) pre-disaster mitigation program for non-BRIC purposes until the court renders a final judgment.
07/16/2025
Complaint
Complaint filed.
Twenty states filed a lawsuit on July 16, 2025 claiming that termination of the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) pre-disaster mitigation program and repurposing BRIC funds violates separation of powers and is contrary to law in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act, and that withholding appropriated funds violates separation of powers, the Appropriations Clause, and the Spending Clause, and is also contrary to law in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. The states also challenged the authority of the acting FEMA Administrators to terminate the BRIC program. In addition, they asserted an equitable ultra vires claim. The states alleged that the shutdown of the program had forced communities across the country “to delay, scale back, or cancel hundreds of mitigation projects depending on this funding,” including climate resilience projects.
Summary
Challlenge brought by 20 states to the termination of the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) pre-disaster mitigation program, which states used for climate resilience projects, and the repurposing of BRIC funds.