Attorney General Brown Preserves Billions in Federal Funding, Defends Civil Rights, and Safeguards Essential Public Service

​

BALTIMORE, MD – Over the past year, Marylanders have faced unprecedented threats to critical federal funding, civil rights protections, and essential public services as a result of sweeping changes in federal policy. When unlawful actions have placed Maryland’s residents, economy, and institutions at risk, the Office of the Attorney General, often as part of a coalition of 23 attorneys general, has acted to protect Marylanders and the State’s interests, and to prevent significant harm to social programs, businesses, and the State’s economy.

Throughout 2025, Attorney General Anthony G. Brown exercised his constitutional and statutory responsibilities as the State’s chief legal officer to intervene when federal actions threatened Maryland’s funding, public safety infrastructure, environment, healthcare systems, and other essential services, as well as the civil rights of Marylanders.

Based on lessons learned during the previous Trump administration, Attorney General Brown took proactive steps in late 2024 to ensure Maryland would have the resources necessary to be prepared to respond quickly if federal actions threatened the State’s interests. Before the start of the new presidential term, the Attorney General established the Federal Accountability Unit (FAU) to ensure Maryland had the legal structure in place to protect its residents, economy, and essential public services from day one.

When a wave of executive orders and federal policy changes began immediately after January 20, 2025, the FAU was already operational, allowing Maryland to act swiftly against those federal actions that caused harm to the State and its residents.

Through litigation, amicus briefs, and multistate advocacy, the Attorney General’s actions in 2025 preserved billions in federal funding for Maryland and prevented additional unlawful costs that would have been shouldered by the State and its residents. These funds directly support healthcare, education, infrastructure, environmental protection, public safety, and other essential public services relied upon by Marylanders statewide.

“The numbers speak for themselves: investing in the Federal Accountability Unit protects Marylanders' lives and livelihoods and safeguards the resources our State needs to serve its residents,” said Attorney General Brown. “Our legal victories have preserved billions in funding for Maryland and defended the rights and dignity of all Marylanders – meeting our responsibility to stand up for Maryland when the federal government threatens its pocketbook, its principles, or its people.”

“We have been clear: We will work with anyone to make progress in Maryland, but we will bow to no one. We will never back down from protecting our people,” said Governor Wes Moore. “Our administration has worked side-by-side with Attorney General Brown and his team to pursue the funding, resources, and support that the federal government is obligated to provide. We will continue to pursue justice, protect constitutional rights, and promote the very ideals that make Maryland exceptional. We will never waver from our principles, and I am grateful that we have an attorney general who always has our back. 

In its first year of operation, the Attorney General’s Federal Accountability Unit led or joined more than 50 lawsuits challenging federal actions that threatened the State of Maryland and its residents, in addition to submitting multistate comment letters and leading or joining dozens of amicus briefs. The actions detailed below reflect the breadth and scope of the effort undertaken by the Maryland Attorney General’s office in the past year to protect Marylanders, safeguard public resources, and uphold the rule of law. A complete list of these lawsuits, as well as amicus briefs that Maryland led or co-led, can be found here. 

Preserving Federal Funding and the Federal Government’s Commitments to Maryland: Maryland has led or joined several actions seeking to preserve funding and commitments the federal government has already pledged to Maryland

·       FBI Headquarters. In November 2025, Maryland and Prince George’s County filed a lawsuit to stop the Trump administration’s unlawful attempt to prevent construction of a new FBI headquarters in Greenbelt, Maryland. Congress required the federal government to select a site for a new FBI headquarters from one of three suburban locations and allocated over $1 billion for this project, which would be diverted away from Maryland if the headquarters were not built in Greenbelt, the site selected following the process directed by Congress. This lawsuit is pending.

·       AmeriCorps. Maryland successfully led a multistate effort to compel the restoration of nearly $400 million worth of AmeriCorps programs nationwide that had been abruptly terminated. In that same case, Maryland and its partner states later secured the release of nearly $175 million in funding for AmeriCorps programs nationwide, including for programs engaging low-income seniors, at-risk youth, and victims of natural disasters. In total, this lawsuit protected $14.6 million for AmeriCorps programs in Maryland. 

·       Beltsville Agricultural Research Center (BARC). Our Office submitted an extensive comment to the United States Department of Agriculture to object to its efforts to close the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center, which supports over 1,000 Maryland jobs and irreplaceable agricultural knowledge and research partnerships.

·       Federal Funding Freeze. After the Trump administration imposed on January 27, 2025 a policy to withhold trillions of dollars from states across the country, our Office filed a lawsuit that successfully protected access to billions of dollars in already awarded federal grants to Maryland, including more than $92 million to the Maryland Department of Human Services in early 2025 and $60 million in reimbursement to which the state was entitled for Francis Scott Key Bridge emergency clean-up activities.

Protecting Federal Employees: Maryland has brought legal challenges that are critical to protecting Maryland’s federal workers against the harmful actions of the Trump administration. 

·       Mass Terminations of Federal Employees. Maryland has played a key role in pushing back on the Administration’s unprecedented assault on federal employees.

• Our office led a coalition of 20 attorneys general in emergency proceedings in litigation that resulted in the temporary reinstatement of roughly 24,000 probationary employees at twenty federal agencies who had been abruptly fired in mass layoffs. Many of those 24,000 were Maryland residents. Although that decision was ultimately reversed by the Fourth Circuit, many agencies did not seek to terminate their probationary employees again after they were reinstated. And those employees who were eventually re-terminated received several additional paychecks due to the litigation in the district court.
• We successfully stopped the Trump administration from closing or substantially restructuring various United States Department of Health and Human Services offices, including sub-agencies within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; the Food and Drug Administration; the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration; and the Administration for Children and Families, which manages the Head Start program, which prevented the mass terminations of about 10,000 individuals within those offices. Several HHS offices are located in Maryland, so this action likely preserved employment for hundreds or thousands of Maryland residents.

·       Dismantling of Federal Agencies. Among other things, the unit challenged reductions in force and dismantling plans at several federal agencies.

• Discrete Federal Agencies. Maryland successfully stopped the Trump administration from the dismantling of the Institute of Museum and Library Services, the Interagency Council on Homelessness, the Minority Business Development Agency, and the Federal Mediation and Service, preserving a total of approximately $5 million in annual federal funding for Maryland.
• Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Maryland recently brought a new complaint challenging the Trump Administration’s efforts to defund and disband the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). In addition to hurting consumers who seek help from the CFPB to protect them from unlawful business practices, the elimination of the CFPB harms consumers because attorneys general offices, including in Maryland, rely on data the Bureau is legally required to share with states to fight consumer and civil rights violations.

Preserving Marylanders’ Rights and Dignity: Maryland has brought several actions seeking to preserve the rights and dignity of Marylanders. 

·       Immigration. In several lawsuits, Maryland has challenged federal funding conditions aimed at attacking and undermining Maryland’s immigrant communities. 

• Birthright Citizenship. Maryland was part of a coalition that has obtained nationwide relief, subject to potential further review by the Supreme Court, against President Trump’s Executive Order seeking to end the principle of birthright citizenship protected by the U.S. Constitution. The order threatened the constitutional rights of children born in Maryland, created legal uncertainty for Maryland families, and would have imposed significant administrative and legal burdens on the State.
• United States Department of Transportation Funding. In one lawsuit, co-led by Maryland against the Department of Transportation, we were able to stop efforts to withhold federal funding unless states agreed to participate in unrelated federal immigration enforcement activities, which had threatened more than $1 billion each year that Maryland relies on for its roads, highways, and transit systems. The federal government has moved to dismiss its appeal in the case.
• National Guard. Maryland has led and co-led several amicus briefs in support of other jurisdictions challenging the deployment of the National Guard in their jurisdictions, including an amicus brief led by our office filed with the Supreme Court that supported Illinois’s challenge to the Guard’s federalization and deployment in Illinois. In December, the Supreme Court ruled for Illinois and kept in place an injunction blocking the Trump administration from deploying the Guard into Illinois. Maryland participated to protect the principles that preserve the State’s authority over its National Guard, ensure Guard members remain available to respond to emergencies and perform essential services in Maryland, safeguard public safety, and prevent federal actions that could chill lawful expression and assembly by Marylanders.
• United States Department of Homeland Security and FEMA Grants. Maryland also joined a coalition of states in successfully preventing the Department of Homeland Security from imposing grant terms that would have required states to participate in unrelated federal immigration enforcement activities. The court sided with us in this case, preserving over $2 billion in funds received by the Maryland Department of Emergency Management in FFY 2024 alone. In another case, in which the Trump administration demanded states provide certain state population data that excluded persons who have been removed under immigration laws in order to receive grant funding, we secured a judgment preventing FEMA from attaching unlawful and onerous conditions to $18 million in grant funding to Maryland.
• Victims of Crime Act Funding. Maryland also joined two lawsuits challenging immigration-related terms in United States Department of Justice grants issued under the Victims of Crime Act. In the face of one lawsuit, the Department of Justice agreed that the terms, which would have required recipients to comply with the administration’s immigration priorities, would not be included in the final grant terms. Likewise, in the face of the other lawsuit, the Trump administration abandoned grant terms that threatened to cut off certain legal services for victims and survivors of sexual assault and domestic violence who could not prove their immigration status.  Our actions protected more than $23 million in federal Victims of Crime Act funding for Maryland in FY 2025.

 ·       Federal Benefits. Maryland has also participated in several actions to challenge the federal government’s threats to essential federal benefits.

• Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Maryland has participated in several actions seeking to preserve SNAP benefits for Marylanders. Our office was part of a coalition that successfully obtained temporary relief against the United States Department of Agriculture’s threat to suspend SNAP for 680,000 Marylanders during the government shutdown. The shutdown ended before the relief could have any meaningful effect, but had the government remained closed, the district court’s relief would have stopped the federal government from cutting off SNAP benefits. In another lawsuit, Maryland was successful in obtaining a preliminary injunction preventing the federal government from demanding personal data on millions of SNAP recipients. And after Maryland and other states sued the federal government to challenge guidance that wrongly deemed certain non-citizens ineligible for SNAP benefits, the administration reversed its position and confirmed that such non-citizens remain eligible. The court then issued a preliminary injunction that prevented the federal government from cutting off benefits to these non-citizens and temporarily blocked the government from imposing financial penalties on states for errors in implementing this guidance.
• Medicaid. Maryland joined a multistate lawsuit, winning preliminary relief which prevented the federal government from sharing Medicaid data for purposes of immigration enforcement. Although a district court recently allowed for certain data to be shared, the scope of the data was much more limited than the federal government sought. Maryland’s participation protects the privacy of the more than 1.5 million Maryland residents—nearly one in four people in the State—who participate in the Medicaid program.
• Housing. Maryland joined a lawsuit challenging the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in its unlawful changes to its Continuum of Care grant program, which would have limited access to long-term care and services for Marylanders experiencing homelessness. This lawsuit resulted in a preliminary injunction against various program changes, including one that would result in an estimated $45 million in cuts to permanent housing projects and more than 4,000 individuals losing housing assistance in Maryland. 
• Public Health. Our office sued the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for terminating nearly $11 billion in critical public health grants to the states, including approximately $200 million in grants to Maryland alone. We obtained a preliminary injunction preserving this funding across the country.

·       Gender-Affirming Care. Maryland has joined several actions pushing back on the federal government’s attack on gender identity and gender-affirming care. In particular, Maryland was part of a coalition of states that prevented the federal government from imposing conditions on states receiving Personal Responsibility Education Program grants that would have forced those states to remove references to gender identity from education materials. The litigation to preserve the funding is ongoing, but Maryland’s grants at risk are worth about $950,000. In addition, Maryland has joined two other lawsuits, both of which are currently active, challenging different actions of the Trump administration trying to limit and undermine gender-affirming care.

·       Voting Rights. When the Trump administration attempted to impose sweeping voting restrictions across the country – even though the U.S. Constitution gives the president no role in setting election rules – our Office sued. We successfully secured a preliminary injunction halting the parts of this unlawful executive order that would have disenfranchised many voters by imposing burdensome proof-of-citizenship requirements and prohibiting the counting of ballots mailed on or before Election Day but received shortly after. Maryland participated to protect its 425 million voters, defend its constitutional role in administering elections, and prevent federal actions that would disrupt Maryland’s election systems and the lawful counting of votes. 

·       Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA). Maryland co-led a multistate Attorneys General comment letter to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) strongly opposing the CFPB’s proposed changes to regulations implementing ECOA, including changes that would eliminate liability for the disparate impacts of discrimination in credit markets. Our participation focused on preserving existing ECOA protections and preventing regulatory changes that could weaken safeguards against discriminatory treatment of Maryland credit applicants.

·       Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE). Maryland led a multistate amicus objecting to the United States’ efforts to enter into a consent decree that threatened Maryland’s implementation of the DBE Program even though Maryland was not a party to the lawsuit. The DBE Program, which Congress created in 1983, tasks the states with overseeing the administration of major federally funded transportation and infrastructure projects, including ensuring that contracts are awarded in a fair and nondiscriminatory way. That litigation remains ongoing.  

Protecting the Environment and Clean Energy Investments

Maryland has led and joined several lawsuits to protect the environment and advance clean energy. 

·       Solar for All. Maryland led a lawsuit on behalf of 24 plaintiffs to challenge the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s decision to cancel billions of dollars in grant money under the Solar for All program, a program designed to promote clean energy for low- and moderate-income individuals and families. Our office brought breach-of-contract claims to recover the funds that the EPA unlawfully terminated, including over $60 million for the Maryland Clean Energy Center. 

·       U.S. Wind. Maryland filed an amicus brief in support of the US Wind project off the coast of Maryland, fighting to protect an estimated $6 billion in economic development for the state and a growing industry that Maryland has already issued over $16 million in state grants to support. The litigation over the project is ongoing. 

·       Electric Vehicle Infrastructure: Our office joined multistate litigation challenging the Trump administration’s efforts to revoke or withhold previously awarded funding for electric vehicle infrastructure. In June 2025, Maryland was part of a coalition of states that secured a preliminary injunction requiring the U.S. Department of Transportation to reinstate funding for the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure program, including $34.5 million awarded to Maryland. And, in December, Maryland joined 15 other states and the District of Columbia in suing the United States Department of Transportation for freezing funding through the Charging and Fueling Infrastructure and Electric Vehicle Charger Reliability and Availability Accelerator grant programs, including more than $56 million awarded to Maryland.

·       Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program. Maryland joined a coalition of states that thwarted the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) efforts to terminate the BRIC program and divert its funds to unrelated projects, preserving Maryland’s eligibility for over $50 million in selected applications placed in limbo by the program’s cancellation -  including for projects to mitigate flooding in Crisfield, Maryland, and to protect critical infrastructure in South Baltimore -  that will strengthen our communities’ resilience to natural disasters.

·       Department of Energy Indirect Costs Cap. Maryland joined other states to challenge a federal rule that limited the portion of a grant that could be used to cover basic operating costs, like staff salaries and benefits. Because of this rule, the Maryland Energy Administration lost nearly $1 million in funding on one grant alone that would normally help pay for the people who run Maryland’s energy programs. A court struck down the cap, allowing Maryland and other states to deploy grant funding for energy programs more effectively.

Defending Maryland Schools and Higher Education Institutions

Maryland has participated, including taking a leading role, in numerous actions supporting Maryland K-12 schools and higher education institutions, preserving hundreds of millions of dollars.

·       Higher Education. FAU has brought approximately a dozen lawsuits in the past year to protect Maryland Higher Education institutions.

• Indirect Cost Cap. In one case joined by our Office, NIH tried to cap indirect cost reimbursement. Maryland joined a lawsuit with other states to push back and received a permanent injunction in district court. The First Circuit recently affirmed that decision. For University of Maryland Baltimore and University of Maryland College Park, we have estimated that the permanent injunction preserved more than a combined $50 million annually that those schools use to support its research programs. In a second case involving indirect cost caps, our Office successfully preserved approximately $7 million in grant funding for University of Maryland, College Park by winning a final judgment in a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Defense when it imposed a 15 percent cap on indirect costs for DOD research grants.
• NIH Grant Terminations and Delay. After the NIH issued directives blacklisting certain research topics and terminated related grants, Maryland helped co-lead a lawsuit challenging the actions. In addition to obtaining a judgment requiring the federal government to reinstate more than $30 million in research grants to Maryland universities, the states reached a settlement in which NIH committed to a timetable for taking action on pending grant applications that had been unduly delayed.

·       K-12 Education. Maryland also participated in several lawsuits seeking to preserve education funding for K-12 schools.

• Education Stabilization Fund. Maryland joined a coalition of states in challenging the premature cut-off of the COVID-era Education Stabilization Fund. The district court agreed with the states and granted a preliminary injunction preserving the funding, and the Second Circuit denied a stay of the preliminary injunction. For Maryland schools, this preserved approximately $188 million dollars.
• Education Formula Grants. After the United States Department of Education froze education formula grants, a coalition of states, including Maryland, sued. In response, the federal government agreed to make remaining funds for the affected programs available. In response to our lawsuit and motion for preliminary injunction, the administration released more than $110 million in formula grants to Maryland public schools and adult education programs.
• Full-Service Community Schools. Maryland recently led a lawsuit challenging the non-continuation of full-service community schools grants that help provide support for K-12 school children and their families, including in schools in Baltimore. If successful, this litigation could save approximately $800,000 in funding for programs at two Baltimore public schools.
• Mental Health Grants. In this case filed against the U.S. Department of Education, Maryland and a coalition of states challenged the termination of grants supporting mental health resources for K-12 schools, including grants to Bowie State and University of Maryland, Baltimore. Our win in this case means that approximately $4.6 million in grant programs at Maryland Universities were not cancelled.

Public Safety. Aligned with Attorney General Brown’s strategic plan to strengthen public safety, our Office co-led litigation against the Trump administration after it announced plans to distribute thousands of machinegun conversion devices (MCDs), which dramatically increase a firearm’s rate of fire and are illegal in Maryland, to communities across the United States. These devices have been frequently used in violent crimes and mass shootings, worsening the gun violence epidemic in the United States and putting lives at risk. To protect communities and families from the devastating effects of gun violence, Maryland was one of several plaintiff states that compelled the federal government to agree not to return these devices to our state and to instruct recipients of the devices not to bring them into Maryland.

Attorney General Brown thanks the members of his staff, across all units, divisions, and clients, our client agencies, the Moore/Miller administration, and other local partners who have worked tirelessly to serve Maryland and protect its residents from harms inflicted by unlawful and dangerous federal policy shifts this past year.

###

​ 

​​​