Summary of the Court Document:

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of State, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and related officials, challenging the abrupt suspension of federal funding for refugee resettlement programs. The complaint alleges violations of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), the Refugee Act of 1980, the Impoundment Control Act, and constitutional separation of powers principles.

Key Points:

1. Background:
   • USCCB has partnered with the federal government since 1980 to provide domestic resettlement services (housing, food, job training, English classes) to refugees and Afghan Special Immigrant Visa holders.
   • The programs are funded through annual cooperative agreements with the State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM). USCCB currently manages ~$65 million in federal funds and serves ~17% of U.S.-resettled refugees.
2. Suspension of Funding:
   • On January 24, 2025, the State Department suspended all payments to USCCB, citing a January 20 Executive Order pausing foreign aid and vague claims that the programs no longer align with agency priorities.
   • The suspension halted reimbursements for services already provided to 6,700+ refugees in their 90-day resettlement period, leaving USCCB with $13 million in unpaid costs and forcing layoffs of 50 staff.
3. Legal Claims:
   • Violation of Appropriations Statutes & Separation of Powers: Congress appropriated funds for refugee resettlement, which remain available. The suspension unlawfully withholds congressionally mandated spending, violating the Refugee Act of 1980 and the Impoundment Control Act (which restricts executive deferrals of funds without congressional approval).
   • Arbitrary and Capricious Action (APA): The government failed to consider the catastrophic impact on refugees, USCCB, and subrecipients, ignored reliance interests, and provided no valid rationale (e.g., misclassifying domestic aid as “foreign assistance”).
   • Failure to Conduct Notice-and-Comment Rulemaking: The suspension is a substantive rule altering legal rights but was implemented without required public input.
4. Harm Alleged:
   • Irreparable damage to USCCB’s operations, reputation, and partnerships.
   • Refugees risk losing critical support (housing, food, medical care) during their transition.
   • Threatens long-term viability of public-private refugee resettlement efforts.
5. Relief Sought:
   • Declare the suspension unlawful.
   • Injunction to resume funding and reimburse USCCB for incurred costs.
   • Attorneys’ fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act.

Relevant Citations:

• Statutes: Refugee Act of 1980 (8 U.S.C. § 1522), Impoundment Control Act (2 U.S.C. § 684), APA (5 U.S.C. § 706).
• Precedent: Train v. City of New York (1975) (executive cannot ignore congressional appropriations), In re Aiken County (D.C. Cir. 2013) (agency must spend appropriated funds as mandated).

Response from ArchBishop Vigano: