States Sue Over Anti-DEI Conditions on Food Stamp, SNAP Funding

The Trump administration could withhold billions of dollars in funding for food stamps and school lunches unless states certify they comply with “vague, extraneous, and unreasoned” ideological conditions, a coalition of 20 states and the District of Columbia said in a suit filed Monday against the US Department of Agriculture.

“The USDA and the Trump administration are again attempting to coerce and bully states into complying with their unlawful policies, all at the expense of our community’s well-being,” said Attorney General Kwame Raoul of Illinois, one of the states challenging the funding conditions, at a news conference Monday.

The conditions on USDA funding would require compliance with federal anti-discrimination policies, as well as preclude grant recipients from using the money to “promote gender ideology” or putting money toward initiatives that “provide incentives for illegal immigration,” the complaint says.

And the administration has indicated it will vigorously enforce those conditions, according to the complaint, which was filed in the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts.

“USDA has not expressly stated whether it intends that the Challenged Conditions apply to the funding it administers for entitlement programs, but given USDA’s stated intent to maximally apply the 2026 Conditions, Plaintiff States are left with no choice but to assume such intent,” they said, noting that they get more than $74 billion annually from the department.

One USDA agency has said compliance with the “anti-discrimination” condition could require recipients to get rid of diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, even if they don’t run afoul of federal law, the complaint says; that agency also indicated that recipients of federal funding might have to get rid of references to transgender people in their curricula.

“With billions at stake for life-sustaining food and critical funding for their residents, the States may be forced to accept funding conditions that they fundamentally do not understand, that are designed to coerce the States and their instrumentalities to adopt USDA’s policies, and which are ultimately unlawful,” the complaint says.

Potentially at stake is funding for safety-net programs such as the Emergency Food Assistance Program and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, better known as WIC. Funds for school lunches, firefighting programs, and university-level agricultural research might also be at risk, the complaint says.

The states want a judge to declare the funding conditions illegal and bar their enforcement.

The complaint brings claims under the Spending Clause of the US Constitution as well as the Administrative Procedure Act.

The plaintiff states are representing themselves.

Massachusetts v. US Dep’t. of Agric., D. Mass., No. 1:26-cv-11396, complaint 3/23/26.