California, Other States Sue Trump Administration Over $600 Million in Public Health Cuts
California, Colorado, Illinois, and Minnesota have filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration Wednesday challenging its decision to slash $600 million in funding for programs designed to prevent and track the spread of HIV, particularly within the LGBTQ+ community. The states argue the cuts are motivated by “political animus” and disagreements over unrelated policy issues.
Attorneys representing the states contend in a complaint filed in federal court in Illinois that the administration is attempting to leverage federal funding to force states to align with President Trump’s agenda, a tactic they believe has repeatedly failed in the past.
The funding in question, administered by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), had been allocated to disease control programs in all four states. However, California Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office stated that his state will bear the largest share of the reductions.
Specifically, California is set to lose $130 million from a Public Health Infrastructure Block Grant. This grant supports the state and local public health departments in funding their workforce, monitoring disease spread, and responding to public health emergencies, according to Bonta’s office.
“President Trump… is using federal funding to compel states and jurisdictions to follow his agenda,” Bonta said in a statement. “Those efforts have all previously failed, and we expect that to happen once again.”
The lawsuit names Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. As a defendant, citing his repeated efforts to move the agency away from evidence-based HIV monitoring and prevention programs over the past year. The Trump administration has also faced criticism for broadly targeting federal spending towards states with Democratic leadership or initiatives supporting the LGBTQ+ community.
The White House justified the cuts by claiming the programs “promote DEI and radical gender ideology,” but offered no further explanation. Health officials reportedly stated the cuts were made to programs that did not align with the CDC’s priorities.
The Los Angeles County Department of Public Health estimates the cuts will result in the loss of approximately $64.5 million for 14 county grant programs, potentially leading to “increased costs, more illness, and preventable deaths.” These programs cover a wide range of public health functions, including disaster response, outbreak control (measles, flu), disease surveillance (West Nile, dengue, hepatitis A), HIV and sexually transmitted disease monitoring and treatment, chronic disease management (diabetes, obesity), and community health support.
A significant portion of the cuts will impact the department’s National HIV Behavioral Surveillance Project, described as a “critical” early-warning system for emerging HIV trends. Dr. Paul Simon, an epidemiologist at the UCLA Fielding School and former chief science officer for the county’s public health department, called slashing the program “dangerous” and “shortsighted,” warning it would leave public health officials without crucial data on the disease’s progression.
Further cuts are anticipated for the City of Long Beach, UCLA, and nine community health providers, including $383,000 for the Los Angeles LGBT Center’s community HIV prevention programs.
California Democrats have strongly condemned the cuts. Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) characterized the move as an unlawful attempt by Trump to punish blue states that “won’t bend to his extremist agenda.”
“His message to the 1.2 million Americans living with HIV is clear: their lives are not a priority, political retribution is,” Padilla said in a statement.
The states’ lawsuit argues the administration’s decision “singles out jurisdictions for disfavor based not on any rational purpose related to the goals of any program but rather based on partisan animus.” The lawsuit seeks a court declaration that the cuts are unlawful and a permanent injunction preventing the administration from implementing them or engaging in similar retaliatory actions regarding federal funding in the future.
