The multistate coalition filed suit challenging USDA's "2026 Conditions," which require states to certify compliance with broad, undefined federal "policies" including restrictions on "gender ideology," immigration, and "fair athletic opportunities" to receive congressionally allocated funding. The conditions apply to nearly all USDA programs, spanning agricultural research, farm support, forestry, wildfire prevention, school lunch programs, SNAP, WIC, and The Emergency Food Assistance Program.
"The federal government cannot hold critical funding hostage to force states to comply with vague, ideological directives," said Attorney General James. "These new conditions put essential programs at risk and cause chaos for states that rely on this funding to feed families, support farmers, and keep communities safe." The attorneys general argue the conditions fail to clearly define prohibited conduct, leaving states to guess at compliance while facing severe financial penalties.
The lawsuit seeks a court order prohibiting USDA from implementing or enforcing the new conditions. The attorneys general contend the requirements are unconstitutionally vague, exceed USDA's legal authority, and were imposed without following required legal procedures. They argue the conditions are designed to coerce states into adopting federal policy preferences unrelated to USDA's mission.
In New York, the threatened funding cuts could affect millions who depend on nutrition assistance and disrupt the state's agricultural sector from North Country dairy producers to Hudson Valley and Long Island specialty crop growers. State agencies and universities could lose agricultural research funding, while forestry and wildfire prevention programs face potential disruption. The conditions also threaten WIC services for pregnant people, infants, and young children.
The Trump administration's move represents a significant expansion of federal conditions on state funding, using USDA programs as leverage for broader policy goals. The challenge comes as food assistance demand remains elevated and states rely heavily on federal agricultural support programs. USDA provides tens of billions annually to states for programs sustaining the nation's food system and rural economies.
The coalition includes attorneys general from Democratic-led states spanning California to Maine, plus the District of Columbia. The case highlights growing tensions between federal agencies and state governments over the scope of conditions attached to federal funding, with states arguing the new requirements exceed constitutional limits on federal coercion.