Filed Date: May 16, 2025
Case Ongoing
Clearinghouse coding complete
This case is about the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) alleged unlawful withholding of congressionally appropriated anti-terrorism funds from major U.S. cities, undermining local efforts to maintain public safety and preparedness. On May 16, 2025, the City of Chicago filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against DHS and its Secretary. The plaintiffs challenged the freezing of funds under the Securing the Cities counterterrorism program, which supported efforts to prevent nuclear and other terrorist attacks in high-risk urban areas. The plaintiffs claimed that since February 2025, the defendants had not processed Chicago’s reimbursement requests for pre-approved expenditures under the program. The plaintiffs alleged that the funding freeze exceeded the defendants’ statutory authority and violated both the Separation of Powers and the Administrative Procedure Act. Represented by public counsel from the City of Chicago Department of Law, the plaintiffs sought declaratory relief and injunctive relief to enjoin the defendants from freezing the funding and to require them to process all pending and future reimbursement requests in accordance with the law. The case was assigned to District Judge John Joseph Tharp Jr.
On June 17, 2025, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint adding the cities of San Francisco, Seattle, Denver, and Boston as plaintiffs. The amended filing detailed each city’s reliance on the Securing the Cities program and the harms caused by DHS’s freeze on 2025 reimbursements and its failure to release approved 2024 funds. While the original complaint emphasized Administrative Procedure Act violations, the amended filing placed greater weight on the Appropriations Clause, arguing that DHS’s withholding of congressionally allocated funds was unlawful. It also highlighted the urgency of restoring funding before major events requiring heightened security, including political conventions and national holidays.
The case is ongoing.
Summary Authors
Scott Shuchart (5/21/2025)
Victoria Tan (8/17/2025)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70282724/parties/city-of-chicago-v-united-states-department-of-homeland-security/
Anderson, Teresa Kay (Illinois)
Dinning, Samuel Bay (Illinois)
Eisenberg, Sara J (Illinois)
Harris, Nancy E. (Illinois)
Chicago, AUSA - (Illinois)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70282724/city-of-chicago-v-united-states-department-of-homeland-security/
Last updated Aug. 21, 2025, 4:33 p.m.
State / Territory: Illinois
Case Type(s):
Presidential/Gubernatorial Authority
Special Collection(s):
Trump Administration 2.0: Challenges to the Government
Trump Administration 2.0: Challenges to the Government (Spending Freezes/Cuts)
Key Dates
Filing Date: May 16, 2025
Case Ongoing: Yes
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
Cities of Chicago, San Francisco, Seattle, Denver, and Boston
Plaintiff Type(s):
Public Interest Lawyer: Yes
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Department of Homeland Security (- United States (national) -), Federal
Defendant Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq.
Constitutional Clause(s):
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: None Yet / None
Nature of Relief:
Source of Relief:
Issues
Presidential/Gubernatorial Authority: