Federal Grants Restored to Four States After Legal Challenge
A U.S. District Court judge in Illinois has issued a temporary restraining order reinstating over $602 million in public health grants to California, Colorado, Illinois, and Minnesota. The grants had been canceled by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on February 11, 2026, a move that sparked lawsuits from the affected states.
Background of the Cuts
The OMB ordered the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to cancel the grants, along with $943 million in funding from the U.S. Department of Transportation, totaling more than $1.5 billion in cuts to the four states. The cuts were first reported by the New York Post on February 4, 2026 [1]. An HHS spokesperson stated the grants were terminated because they did not align with agency priorities [2].
Legal Action and Restraining Order
The states filed lawsuits to reinstate the funds, arguing that the cuts were unlawful and detrimental to public health. On February 12, 2026, the judge granted a temporary restraining order, blocking the cuts for 14 days while the case proceeds [3].
Impacted Programs
A significant portion of the terminated grants was allocated to the Public Health Infrastructure Grant (PHIG) program. Since 2022, the PHIG program has distributed over $5 billion to health departments across the country [CDC Website]. The program is scheduled to expire on November 30, 2027 [CDC Website].
Specifically, Minnesota faced the cancellation of $38 million in PHIG funding, which was being used for staffing, emergency planning, and improving local public health services [4]. Colorado was notified of the potential loss of $22 million in unspent PHIG funds [4]. California and Illinois were at risk of losing over $100 million in PHIG funds combined [5].
Beyond PHIG, Colorado also received notices regarding the termination of grants for STI surveillance, STD prevention and control, and HIV behavioral surveillance [4].
Concerns from Public Health Experts
Public health experts have expressed concern over the impact of these cuts. Anna K. Person, MD, FIDSA, chair of the HIV Medicine Association, noted that many of the grants support access to HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), a critical tool in preventing the spread of HIV [6].
Looking Ahead
The temporary restraining order provides a reprieve for the four states, but the legal battle over the grant funding is ongoing. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for public health funding and the relationship between state and federal governments.
Sources:
- New York Post
- California Attorney General’s Office
- Bloomberg Law
- Minnesota Department of Health
- Illinois Attorney General’s Office
- HIV Medicine Association
Worth a look