Source: US State of New York

EW YORK – New York Attorney General Letitia James and 15 other attorneys general sued the U.S. Department of Education (ED) and Secretary of Education Linda McMahon for unlawfully terminating more than $1 billion in bipartisan federal funding for school-based mental health services. Attorney General James and the coalition are challenging ED’s abrupt decision to discontinue funding for two mental health grant programs – the Mental Health Service Professional Demonstration Grant Program (MHSP) and the School-Based Mental Health Services Grant Program (SBMH) – which Congress created in response to the worsening youth mental health crisis and a series of tragic school shootings, including in Parkland, Florida and Uvalde, Texas. The attorneys general argue that ED’s terminations are unconstitutional and ideologically driven, and are urging the court to reinstate the funding and protect the critical youth mental health infrastructure schools have built under these programs.

“By cutting funding for these lifesaving youth mental health programs, the Department of Education is abandoning our children when they need us most,” said Attorney General James. “These grants have helped thousands of students access critical mental health services at a time when young people are facing record levels of depression, trauma, and anxiety. To eliminate these grants now would be a grave disservice to children and families in New York and nationwide, and my office is fighting back to preserve these much-needed programs.”

“SUNY is grateful to Attorney General James for protecting New Yorkers, including critical resources for mental health support,” said SUNY Chancellor John B. King Jr. “At a time when school-based mental health services are more important than ever, SUNY is proud that our campuses play a vital role in training mental health providers and we will vigorously defend this important work.”

In 2018, following the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Congress established and funded MHSP to address a shortage of mental health professionals in high-need public schools. Two years later, Congress expanded these efforts with SBMH, which provided funding to help schools hire, train, and retain school-based mental health staff. In the wake of the devastating 2022 shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Congress dramatically increased funding for both programs, appropriating more than $100 million annually to each program through 2026 and requiring ED to submit detailed spending plans and biweekly updates. Each program was designed as a five-year initiative, with the goal of placing 14,000 new mental health professionals in schools, particularly those in low-income and rural areas.

In the lawsuit, the attorneys general highlight the broad, bipartisan support behind these programs. As Republican Texas Senator John Cornyn noted, Congress “crafted this landmark law with a simple purpose: to reduce violence and save lives.” He explained that the law contains “commonsense measures to improve how our schools address mental health,” noting that “too often, adolescents with untreated mental health conditions become the very same perpetrators who commit acts of violence.”

Attorney General James and the coalition emphasize that these programs have already demonstrated measurable success. In the first year alone, nearly 775,000 students received mental or behavioral health services. More than 1,200 school-based mental health professionals were hired and 95 percent retained. Student wait times dropped by 80 percent. Grantees reported a 50 percent reduction in suicide risk at high-need schools, lower absenteeism and behavioral incidents, and stronger student-staff relationships.

Despite these successes, on April 29, 2025, the administration abruptly notified dozens of grantees that their funding would be discontinued, claiming that these program were no longer aligned with “current administration priorities.” The boilerplate notices included vague justifications with no specific findings or performance issues. In statements to Congress and the media, ED acknowledged that it targeted grants for discontinuation based on the programs’ diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) goals, despite the fact that such efforts were required under longstanding federal law and were part of the announced criteria used to evaluate and award the grants. 

As a result of the administration’s decision to discontinue mental health funding, Attorney General James and the coalition assert that, starting this fall, public schools nationwide will no longer reliably be able to offer critical mental health services. The attorneys general argue that if allowed to move forward, these terminations will force the layoffs of hundreds of school-based mental health professionals, abruptly end services for thousands of vulnerable students, dismantle graduate training pipelines that were helping to address nationwide shortages, and destroy projects that have been years in the making.

New York stands to lose at least $19 million in previously approved funding as a result of these cuts, including over $7.6 million for the State University of New York (SUNY) system. Unless the terminations are reversed, SUNY Binghamton will be forced to pull mental health professionals from schools serving more than 9,000 rural students, laying off 10 full-time staff and several part-time employees and graduate assistants. SUNY Buffalo would be forced to end a fellowship program training school social workers to serve students in Western New York, jeopardizing care for an estimated 3,000 students. Several New York school districts and private institutions have also had their funding discontinued, jeopardizing mental health services for students in the Bronx, Queens, Brooklyn, Long Island, Hudson Valley, Finger Lakes, Mohawk Valley, Central New York, and other communities throughout the state.

Attorney General James and the coalition argue that the cancellation of this funding is both unlawful and unconstitutional, as it undermines Congress’ authority and equity directive and violates the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) because of the lack of notice. The attorneys general also contend that the administration breached the grant agreements and violated federal regulations that govern the continuation of grant awards. Under these regulations, once a multiyear grant is awarded, the decision to continue funding must be based on the grantee’s performance. In this case, ED failed to offer any evidence that the grantees failed to meet performance standards and instead applied an ideological litmus test after the fact, leaving schools and students to suffer the consequences.

The attorneys general are asking the court to declare these grant terminations unlawful, reinstate the funding for the full intended term of the awards, and prevent ED from imposing similar ideological conditions moving forward.

Joining Attorney General James in this lawsuit are the attorneys general of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and Wisconsin.

MIL OSI USA News –