Judge shields Atlanta from Trump executive orders in federal funding case

A new court order will temporarily protect the city of Atlanta’s federal grant dollars from the Trump administration’s efforts to withhold funding from municipalities because of their diversity, equity and inclusion programs.

In February, the city banded with more than a dozen other cities and counties to become additional plaintiffs in an existing lawsuit filed last summer by a group led by Fresno, California.

Atlanta and the other new plaintiffs in the suit asked a federal judge to temporarily prohibit a handful of federal agencies from enforcing grant conditions that require all entities receiving federal funding, including municipal governments, to participate in immigration enforcement and eliminate DEI initiatives.

On Tuesday, U.S. District Court Judge Richard Seeborg granted that request.

He had already granted similar protection to the lawsuit’s initial group of plaintiffs last fall.

The grant conditions at issue came in the wake of executive orders by President Donald Trump early last year seeking to purge affirmative action or diversity initiatives from the federal government and federal funding recipients, including state and local governments.

Atlanta depended on an estimated $1.4 billion in federal funding last year alone, according to a city document reviewed by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Last summer, Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport lost millions of dollars in Federal Aviation Administration funding after the city-owned airport’s leader refused to sign the new terms, the AJC reported.

While it did quietly rebrand its DEI office last fall, Atlanta has maintained its minority- and women-owned business contracting thresholds. It later opted to join the growing list of state and local governments fighting the new grant conditions in court.

A spokesperson for the city of Atlanta did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the preliminary injunction.

Under Tuesday’s order, the Departments of Housing and Urban Development, Transportation and Health and Human Services cannot impose the anti-DEI and other conditions while the case proceeds, nor can they refuse to issue grant agreements to the plaintiffs because of their participation in the lawsuit.

“(S)ince the key Defendants and grant conditions have not changed materially and Additional Plaintiffs face the same constitutional harm and budgetary uncertainty, the requested extensions are warranted,” Seeborg wrote in his order.