National Alliance to End Homelessness — First Circuit stays order blocking HUD’s $1.3 billion housing set-aside

Case
National Alliance to End Homelessness et al. v. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development et al.
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Judge
Montecalvo; Aframe; Dunlap
Date Decided
September 16, 2026
Docket No.
26-1923
Topics
Administrative law; HUD funding; Notice and comment; Stays pending appeal
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

HUD issued a Notice of Funding Opportunity for its Continuum of Care program that set aside $1.3 billion for transitional-housing and “supportive service only” projects. The plaintiffs included homelessness and housing organizations, service providers, and local governments.

The district court granted summary judgment to the plaintiffs on their claim that HUD had to use notice-and-comment procedures before issuing the funding notice. It concluded that the set-aside was a “bonus or other incentive[]” subject to the procedures in 42 U.S.C. § 11386b(d). HUD sought a stay pending appeal.

The Court’s Holding

The First Circuit granted HUD’s motion for a stay pending appeal. Applying the stay standard in Nken v. Holder, the court held that HUD made a strong showing that it was likely to succeed in challenging the district court’s conclusion that the set-aside was a “bonus or other incentive[]” requiring notice and comment.

The court also found that HUD would suffer irreparable injury without a stay. HUD had until December 1, 2026, to make Continuum of Care awards, and the court concluded that, absent a stay, HUD could not implement the funding notice in time and funding gaps would result.

Key Takeaways

  • The First Circuit stayed the district court’s summary-judgment order while HUD’s appeal proceeds.
  • HUD is likely to prevail, the court said, on its argument that the $1.3 billion set-aside is not a statutory “bonus or other incentive[].”
  • The approaching statutory deadline for making awards established irreparable harm because delay could create funding gaps.

Why It Matters

The order permits HUD to proceed with the challenged Continuum of Care funding notice during the appeal. It also signals the panel’s preliminary view that the statutory notice-and-comment requirement may not extend to this type of program set-aside.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top