Attorney General Letitia James files lawsuit against FEMA after sudden cuts to bipartisan disaster preparedness funding

New York – New York Attorney General Letitia James has taken legal action against the federal government after FEMA abruptly terminated a key disaster preparedness program that has long provided crucial funding to help communities across the country guard against the devastating impacts of natural disasters.

On Tuesday, Attorney General James announced that New York, along with 19 other states, is suing the Trump administration for what she described as an unlawful and dangerous decision to shut down the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program. The lawsuit accuses the administration of acting without legal authority in halting the program and jeopardizing billions of dollars that were designated to strengthen disaster protections in vulnerable communities nationwide.

“This administration’s decision to slash billions of dollars that protect our communities from floods, wildfires, and other disasters puts millions of New Yorkers at risk,” said Attorney General James. “New Yorkers depend on quality roads, floodwalls, and other vital infrastructure to keep them safe when disaster strikes. This administration has no authority to cut this program that has helped save countless lives, and I will continue to fight to ensure New York gets the support we need to prepare for dangerous natural disasters.”

Read also: City employees will receive a special fifty percent discount on registration fees for the popular Pound the Ground 5K event this year

The BRIC program, which has enjoyed bipartisan support since its inception, provides both financial and technical assistance to state, local, tribal, and territorial governments. Its purpose is to help these jurisdictions implement projects aimed at reducing the risks and potential damages associated with natural disasters. These grants often cover up to 75 percent of a project’s costs, with small rural communities qualifying for up to 90 percent coverage. For many municipalities, BRIC funding has been a lifeline, enabling the construction of flood walls, evacuation shelters, fortified water and power infrastructure, and reinforced roads and bridges.

Over the past four years, FEMA has approved nearly 2,000 projects across the country through the BRIC program, allocating roughly $4.5 billion in funding. These projects were designed to mitigate risks in places especially vulnerable to natural disasters, with coastal states like New York among the largest beneficiaries. Studies have shown that investments made through the BRIC program have saved lives and prevented billions in damages. For every dollar spent on these mitigation efforts, an average of $6 has been saved in post-disaster recovery costs.
Altogether, BRIC-funded projects are credited with avoiding more than $150 billion in costs and reducing human suffering in the aftermath of floods, hurricanes, and other catastrophic events.

New York alone currently has 38 BRIC-funded projects in the pipeline, valued at over $380 million, which are now in jeopardy due to FEMA’s decision to terminate the program. New York City, a region particularly vulnerable to flooding and other severe weather events, is counting on BRIC funds for 19 distinct projects. Among them is the Central Harlem Cloudburst Flood Mitigation Project, which is slated to receive $50 million to help protect more than 45,000 residents from dangerous flash flooding along the Harlem River.

Without BRIC funding, state and local governments fear they will be forced to delay or cancel infrastructure projects that have been years in the making. Many of these initiatives have already undergone costly planning, permitting, and environmental review processes, which communities may have to repeat or abandon altogether if funding disappears. In her lawsuit, Attorney General James argues that this abrupt termination has left countless Americans more exposed to the escalating risks posed by climate change and increasingly frequent and severe natural disasters.

Despite the proven success and longstanding bipartisan support of the BRIC program, the Trump administration made the decision to dismantle it in April 2025. FEMA officials redirected over $4 billion from FEMA’s pre-disaster mitigation fund to cover post-disaster grants, a move that critics argue undermines efforts to proactively safeguard communities before disaster strikes. Attorney General James and her coalition of attorneys general contend that this action not only violates federal law but also defies the express intentions of Congress, which has mandated that FEMA prioritize disaster preparedness as a core function of its mission.

Read also: State Police arrest Albany man after late night robbery at a gas station in the town of Malta

Congress has explicitly appropriated funds to FEMA for the purpose of pre-disaster mitigation through programs like BRIC. According to the lawsuit, the executive branch cannot alter FEMA’s mission or divert funds away from disaster preparedness without changes to existing law. Furthermore, the coalition argues that FEMA’s refusal to spend the money as Congress intended constitutes a violation of the Constitution’s separation of powers.

Adding to the controversy, Attorney General James and her fellow attorneys general claim that the FEMA administrator and the acting official who carried out the termination of BRIC were not lawfully appointed to their positions. This raises further questions about the legal authority behind the program’s abrupt shutdown.

The lawsuit seeks both immediate and long-term remedies through the courts. Specifically, Attorney General James and the coalition are asking for a preliminary injunction to prevent the administration from reallocating BRIC funds for other purposes while the case proceeds. They are also pursuing a permanent injunction that would reverse the program’s termination entirely and require FEMA to restore these critical funds to the communities that depend on them.

The legal action brings together a diverse group of states, all of which share the common concern of safeguarding their residents against the devastating impacts of future disasters. Joining Attorney General James in filing the lawsuit are the attorneys general of Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, as well as the governor of Pennsylvania.

Across the nation, officials have warned that without BRIC funding, the country’s ability to prepare for hurricanes, floods, wildfires, and other climate-related threats will be severely undermined. Communities that have historically relied on these resources to strengthen their infrastructure and reduce risk are now left scrambling to find alternative sources of funding.

The stakes are particularly high for areas like New York, where the threats of climate change are no longer distant possibilities but immediate and recurring dangers. Projects designed to shore up defenses against flooding and severe storms are critical to protecting lives and livelihoods.

“This isn’t just about New York,” said Attorney General James. “Communities across the country depend on programs like BRIC to protect their families, their homes, and their future. I will not stand by while this administration puts politics ahead of people’s safety.”

The lawsuit underscores the broader political and legal battles over the role of government in preparing for climate change and natural disasters. As extreme weather becomes more frequent and severe, the question of how the country invests in its defenses against such threats has taken on heightened urgency.

The case is expected to draw national attention as it moves through the courts, with communities, environmental groups, and disaster relief advocates closely watching the outcome. For now, state and local governments must wait to see whether the courts will step in to restore funding that many see as essential to their future resilience.