Texas, Tennessee, Ohio, Missouri Win Injunction Against HHS Funding Cuts

Communities across several U.S. states have successfully halted a significant funding cut by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), safeguarding vital public health resources. The court's decision, though not nationwide, ensures that municipalities like Harris County, Texas; Columbus, Ohio; Nashville and Davidson County, Tennessee; and Kansas City, Missouri, can continue their essential health work.

Legal Battle for Public Health Funding

A lawsuit initiated by these municipalities and supported by the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) led to a court granting an injunction. This decision blocks HHS from terminating grants crucial for protecting public health, including efforts to combat pandemics and infectious diseases.

Harris County Attorney Christian Menefee expressed relief, stating, "Today's decision ensures we can keep doing the work that protects our residents — from tracking disease outbreaks to providing vaccinations and supporting vulnerable families.” This sentiment was echoed by representatives from other municipalities involved in the case, Harris County et al. v. Kennedy, with legal support from Democracy Forward and the Public Rights Project.

Concerns Over Federal Funding Cuts

On March 24, 2025, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. attempted to eliminate over $11 billion in congressionally mandated funding. These funds were intended to help local governments respond to public health threats, including COVID-19, avian flu, and measles outbreaks. AFSCME President Lee Saunders highlighted the critical nature of these funds, noting, "Every tax dollar withheld means fewer staff responding to outbreaks, fewer vaccinations, and greater risk to the public."

The decision has been seen as a partial victory. While the injunction prevents immediate funding cuts, the court did not extend relief on a national scale, which AFSCME and other advocates find concerning as they continue to push for broader protections.

Impact on Public Health Services

The ruling is crucial amidst ongoing threats from various infectious diseases. Joel McElvain of Democracy Forward emphasized the stakes, pointing out that the injunction reflects the urgency of maintaining essential public health services. Jill Habig, CEO of Public Rights Project, stressed, "This case is about stopping federal abuse of power that puts lives at risk."

The federal administration cited the end of the COVID-19 pandemic as a reason for the funding cuts. However, the threatened programs extend beyond COVID-19, including initiatives to address emerging health crises across the nation.

For more details on the lawsuit, read the full complaint and the court's ruling.