Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, LITIGATION NEWS, TRENDS—New York AG James leads lawsuit to block attempts to dismantle safety net programs, (Jul 22, 2025)

By Patricia K. Ruiz, J.D.

Previously, states have offered a wide range of essential services without regard to immigration status.

A lawsuit filed by New York Attorney General (AG) Letitia James and a coalition of 20 other AGs challenges sweeping new directives from the Trump administration that would bar safety net programs from serving all residents regardless of immigration status. The directives, which stem from the executive order (EO), “Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Open Borders,” threaten access to services such as Head Start, Meals on Wheels, child welfare programs, domestic violence shelters, housing assistance, mental health treatment, food banks, and community health centers.

Restrictions based on immigration status. The EO redefines several federally funded programs as restricted federal public benefits, subjecting the programs to immigration verification and excluding not only undocumented immigrants but also some with legal status, including student visa holders, temporary workers, and exchange visitors. The AGs warned that even U.S. citizens and lawful residents may be denied services, as many low-income individuals lack government-issued identification.

Arguments. The federal government acted unlawfully by issuing such mandates without following the rulemaking processes under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). Further, the AGs argue the government misinterpreted the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA), a 1996 law governing access to public benefits that has allowed states to offer a wide range of essential services without regard to immigration status, by applying it to entire programs rather than individual benefits. Finally, the AGs argue the rules violating the Constitution’s Spending Clause, which requires the government to provide clear and fair notice of any new conditions on funding before states accept federal funds.

Relief sought. The AGs ask the court to declare the new rules unlawful, issue preliminary and permanent injunctions to halt the implementation of the rules, vacate the rules and restore long-standing practice, and prevent the federal government from using PRWORA as a pretext to dismantle core safety net programs.

News: LitigationNewsTrends ImmigrationNews Immigration FederalRegulations