Federal court judge will order HUD to reinstate fair housing grants

Namu Sampath/TNS

By Namu Sampath
masslive.com

BOSTON — In a packed courtroom Tuesday afternoon, a federal judge took five minutes to say that he would reinstate federal grants to four fair housing organizations, including one in Western Massachusetts .

Judge Richard G. Stearns of the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts in Boston said every defense argument brought by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the U.S. Department of Government Efficiency already was addressed in a First Circuit Court of Appeals decision filed in California on Friday.

“I am unable to determine the argument for the otherwise capable government’s opposition,” he said.

The DOE case involves eight states, including Massachusetts, that are accusing the Trump administration of illegally slashing $600 million in grants that were congressionally allocated to training teachers. A panel of three circuit judges denied the Department of Education’s motion stay the temporary restraining order in their decision last Friday, reinstating the grants.

The Education Department case is prudent as it’s similar to the HUD lawsuit. Four fair housing organizations across the country, including the Massachusetts Fair Housing Center in Holyoke, are alleging HUD struck a total of nearly $1.3 million in grant funding that was slated to be received later this year or in coming years over the mention of diversity, equity and inclusion in their awards, a HUD official wrote in an affidavit.

“In short, any irreparable harm arguably caused by the (temporary restraining order) is not of a type and magnitude that grabs equities’ emergency attention when compared to the harm that the recipients could well suffer if the (temporary restraining order) is stayed,” the decision says. It further states that the U.S. Education Department did not provide a compelling enough argument to order the halting of the restraining order.

In the earlier DOE case, the judges also said that many of the states in the lawsuit had detailed the effects of the loss of funding, which had already begun to take place: Staff layoffs, program disruptions and the halting of stipends to currently enrolled teachers.
The housing case plaintiffs originally requested relief from both HUD and DOGE, asking that a federal court judge order the federal departments to reinstate the grants.

Julian Canzoneri, the assistant U.S. attorney representing HUD and DOGE, told Stearns the Appellate Court decision did not include an argument that was earlier brought up by the plaintiffs, which stated that DOGE was responsible for ordering HUD to cut the funding.

“The DOGE defendants, external to HUD, cannot direct HUD on its decisions,” said Canzoneri.

The plaintiffs’ motion, filed Monday morning, addresses that point, and have removed DOGE from their request to reinstate the grants.

“Judge Stearns indicated that he will enter a (temporary restraining order) similar to the Department of Education case,” said attorney Lila Miller of Relman Colfax PLLC , a civil rights litigation law firm in Washington, D.C. , that represented the plaintiffs Tuesday, after the hearing. “We anticipate he will file that later today.”

This means that HUD will have to reinstate the grants, Miller said.

Stearns said he appreciated the government’s attorney’s “candor,” but ultimately said that he would rely on the decision made last Friday.

“It’s not that HUD couldn’t have done it; it’s how they went about it,” he said.

It is unclear from the dockets when the next hearing will be in the case.

Looking to navigate the complexities of grants funding? Lexipol is your go-to resource for state-specific, fully-developed grants services that can help fund your needs. Find out more about our grants services here.

©2025 Advance Local Media LLC. Visit masslive.com . Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.