On Monday, El Paso County and Harris County filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, accusing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) of overstepping its authority by tying federal grant money to sweeping changes in local election procedures. The suit was joined by municipalities in Tennessee and Ohio, creating a multi‑state coalition against the new requirements.
Federal grant conditions at issue
In June, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) announced that it would withhold 20% of the Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP) funds unless recipients complied with five new conditions. The conditions would require local officials to replace voting machines that read QR and bar codes with paper‑ballot machines, conduct manual post‑election audits, and run voter‑registration checks through DHS’s Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) system.
The SAVE system has a documented history of misidentifying lawful voters as illegal immigrants. Despite those concerns, the Trump administration promoted its use, claiming—without evidence—that millions of illegal immigrants were registered to vote. In late July, Texas Secretary of State John Scott directed county officials to restore 2,724 voters who had been flagged by SAVE as potential non‑citizens.
Local impact and costs
County officials argue that complying with the new mandates would cost millions of dollars and could actually weaken election security. Harris County points out that Texas law requires counties to finish counting regular ballots within 24 hours of poll closure; a forced shift to paper ballots could jeopardize that deadline.
El Paso County Attorney Christina Sanchez said, “Local election offices already face some of the toughest oversight and requirements designed to keep their operations safe and secure. Imposing additional requirements is both costly and burdensome, while our law‑enforcement agencies rely on this funding to purchase critical equipment that helps protect and save lives.”
Grant funding and public‑safety concerns
The HSGP has traditionally funded preparation and response resources for terrorist attacks and other security threats. Counties contend that withholding the funds would endanger public safety by limiting access to specialized training, equipment and supplies that are paid for with the grant.
Beyond the financial burden, the plaintiffs argue that DHS lacks congressional authority to condition grant money on changes to local election procedures. The suit cites the Constitution’s allocation of spending power to Congress and asserts that the agency’s actions infringe on state and local autonomy.
Broader context
This lawsuit follows a similar filing in July by a coalition of Democratic‑led states that raised comparable concerns about DHS’s requirements. A FEMA spokesperson responded that the agency anticipated “partisan” pushback but emphasized that the measures were intended to protect election integrity.
Since 2023, DHS has required grant recipients to explain how funds would be used for election security, but it has not previously demanded changes to election administration. The plaintiffs maintain that the new conditions represent an unprecedented federal intrusion into state‑run elections.
What’s next?
The case will proceed in federal court, where judges will weigh the agency’s authority against the counties’ claims of constitutional overreach and practical hardship. If the lawsuit succeeds, it could preserve existing voting‑machine contracts, protect grant funding for public‑safety programs, and set a precedent limiting federal conditions on local election practices.
For now, El Paso and Harris counties remain focused on maintaining their current election systems while continuing to rely on Homeland Security grants for essential emergency‑response capabilities.
Original reporting: Texas Tribune (HLL/CB) — read the source article.
