DOT Opts Not To Appeal Permanent Injunction
To the relief of certain Department of Transportation (DOT) grant recipients who took the agency to court, it appears DOT has opted to stand down for now.
In November, the U.S. District Court in Rhode Island issued a permanent injunction against DOT, determining that the agency overstepped its authority by requiring DOT financial assistance recipients to follow specific immigration enforcement conditions to receive funding for road and bridge projects. The court ordered the agency to remove these conditions from grant agreements administered by the 20 states that filed the suit.
The lawsuit stemmed from DOT Secretary Sean P. Duffy’s April 2025 “Follow the Law” letter to recipients of DOT funding emphasizing that they must comply with federal laws that meet priorities under the Trump administration — specifically addressing diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) efforts and civil immigration enforcement — and that noncompliance may lead to penalties. The letter stated that DOT award recipients have a legal obligation to cooperate with and not impede U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) authorities and the Department of Homeland Security in their enforcement of federal immigration law. DOT began adding immigration enforcement condition (IEC) language into grant agreements requiring grant recipients to cooperate with federal officials in enforcing federal immigration law.
Attorneys general from 20 mostly Democratic states sued DOT, asserting that the agency lacks statutory authority to impose the IEC language and that doing so violates both the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and the spending clause of the U.S. Constitution. On Nov. 4, Rhode Island District Court Judge John McConnell, Jr. ruled that DOT’s imposition of the IEC language exceeded its statutory authority. He declared the IEC language unlawful and ordered it vacated from all [DOT-administered] grant agreements with the plaintiff states.
Now it appears DOT will not appeal the ruling. Per a simple document from the First Circuit Court of Appeals, DOT moves “to dismiss this appeal, which each party to bear its own costs. Counsel for plaintiffs-appellees has authorized us to state that plaintiffs-appellees assent to this motion.”
This is win for grantees from the plaintiff states of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin. Be aware that this suit also affected new grant program terms and conditions that the Federal Highway Administration recently issued as the IEC requirement, included in the initial version, has now has been deleted.
There are many other legal challenges involving grant programs working their way through the courts. Hopefully, the results — just like this case — will be positive for recipients.
Join us for our following Thompson Grants event:
Thompson Grants Workshop: Procurement | Jan. 28, 2026 | Virtual Event
