Help keep Salon independent

Trump swipes anti-terrorism funds from Democratic states

Democratic-led states accuse the administration of shifting funds to GOP allies to punish its political opponents

National Affairs Fellow

Published

California Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks during a news conference to kick off the Yes on 50 campaign at the California Democratic Party Headquarters on Aug. 21, 2025 in Sacramento, California. (Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)
California Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks during a news conference to kick off the Yes on 50 campaign at the California Democratic Party Headquarters on Aug. 21, 2025 in Sacramento, California. (Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

The Department of Homeland Security is trying to overhaul the $1 billion Homeland Security Grant Program to shift anti-terrorism funds from Democratic states to Republican strongholds.

According to government records reviewed by Reuters, Wisconsin, North Carolina and Ohio — states that elected President Donald Trump last year — saw the biggest percentage increases in funding from the grant program, which was created after the 9/11 attacks to help states prevent terrorism and other violent threats. Meanwhile, Washington, D.C., Illinois, New Jersey and California — each solidly Democratic — lost between 31% and 70% of what they were initially told to expect.

A DHS spokesperson said the new allocation formula gives “greater weight” to threats from transnational organized crime, defined as criminal networks operating across borders, and now accounts for “illegal border crossings.” The department insists the process was data-driven, not political.

“It is flatly untrue to suggest that these changes are arbitrary or politically motivated,” the spokesperson told Reuters. “Adjustments in award amounts follow a methodical, risk-informed analysis with the goal of ensuring that every dollar spent yields the maximum benefit for the American people.”

Twelve Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia have sued to block the cuts, arguing that the new formula effectively penalizes jurisdictions that limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. U.S. District Judge Mary McElroy temporarily halted the changes, calling them “slapdash” and legally questionable.

DHS criticized that decision as “unprecedented judicial overreach.”

The administration also said earlier this month it had restored New York’s funding after initially proposing a 77% cut. Other states have not had their funding returned.


Start your day with essential news from Salon.
Sign up for our free morning newsletter, Crash Course.


For Trump, the controversy has become another political cudgel. He has repeatedly tied federal spending to partisan loyalty, saying in reference to the ongoing government shutdown, “We’re only cutting Democrat programs.”

Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., has called this approach “mafia-style blackmail, pure and simple,” according to The Washington Post, and “a gross abuse of power” that will continue to prompt legal challenges.

By Blaise Malley

Blaise Malley is a national affairs fellow at Salon.

MORE FROM Blaise Malley

Related Topics ------------------------------------------

Related Articles