WASHINGTON — In a sweeping shift in federal housing policy, HUD Secretary Scott Turner has announced a major enforcement initiative aimed at restricting federal housing assistance to individuals without legal immigration status. The plan marks a sharp recalibration of HUD’s mission, prioritizing citizenship and immigration status as core eligibility criteria for housing aid.
According to an April 4 letter circulated to all HUD grantees, Secretary Turner underscored that “federal housing assistance will no longer be granted to illegal aliens or sanctuary cities,” and that HUD resources “shall be primarily focused on benefiting American citizens and other qualified recipients, not illegal aliens.”
In concrete terms, HUD plans to:
Require local public housing authorities (PHAs) to report immigration status data for tenants receiving federally assisted housing. CRE Daily+2immpolicytracking.org+2
Give PHAs
Enforce grant language requiring compliance with the executive order and restrict funding flows to jurisdictions labeled as “sanctuary cities.”
Launch an inter-agency Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between HUD and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to identify undocumented noncitizens receiving HUD assistance. immpolicytracking.org+1
Advocates and analysts warn that the ripple effects could be massive. A draft rule obtained by ProPublica outlines potential implications:
Up to 4 million people could lose federal housing aid under the proposed rules, which include time limits on assistance, new work requirements, and removal of entire households if one member is undocumented.
Thousands of local PHAs—more than 3 000 agencies—would be pressed to verify immigrant status, a costly and logistically challenging endeavor. CRE Daily+1
Jurisdictions with “sanctuary” policies, or cities that decline to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement, may face funding losses for housing and community development grants.
Supporters, primarily among conservative policymakers, praised the move as necessary to protect taxpayer dollars and enforce immigration law.
HUD Secretary Turner stated that the agency’s housing programs must ensure benefits go to “hardworking American citizens” and not be “riding the coattails of hardworking Americans.”
However, critics argue the policy risks undermining housing access for low-income families and could result in discrimination or homelessness. One housing justice alliance criticized the MOU with DHS as targeting “mixed-status” families and diverting attention away from root causes of housing crises.
Legal challenges loom. For example, a federal judge in Rhode Island temporarily blocked HUD’s new criteria tying homeless-housing grants to compliance with the policy, stating the agency may have overstepped its authority.
This policy signals a convergence of immigration enforcement and housing policy in a way not previously seen at the federal level. By making citizenship and immigration status central to federal housing eligibility, HUD is reshaping its role from one of broad access to one of gatekeeper.
HUD will begin issuing formal compliance letters to PHAs nationwide, starting with high-profile agencies such as the D.C. Housing Authority. CRE Daily+1
Legal challenges may escalate as local jurisdictions push back against funding conditions and status-verification mandates.
Monitoring and enforcement mechanisms will be rolled out across fiscal years 2025–2026; PHAs that fail to comply may face reductions or elimination of HUD funds.
Stakeholders in housing, legal aid and immigrant-serving organizations will closely watch the implementation and impact of this policy shift.
Bottom line: Secretary Scott Turner’s enforcement-first housing strategy marks a pivotal change for federal housing aid—tying assistance more tightly to immigration status and placing agencies under pressure to verify eligibility or face funding consequences. The full impact may take years to play out, but for now, the message is clear: housing support is being redefined with immigration enforcement front and center.
The death toll from this week’s floods on the Indonesian island of Bali has risen to 14 people from nine, a government official said on Thursday (Sep 11), though the rain has stopped and water levels are receding in most areas.
Two people are missing in the tourist hub’s capital of Denpasar, and 125 rescuers have been deployed in the search for them, disaster mitigation agency spokesperson Abdul Muhari said.
He added that more than 500 people have been evacuated to schools and mosques.
Torrential rains on Tuesday and Wednesday caused floods in Denpasar and six of Bali’s eight regions, blocking major roads, including access to the island’s international airport. There were also landslides in some areas.
Most of the deaths occurred when people were swept away after rivers burst their banks, Abdul said.
No foreigners were among the casualties, the agency said.
There were no reports of flight cancellations on Thursday.
In response to CNA’s queries, Budget airline Scoot on Thursday said its flights to and from Bali are currently operating as scheduled.
However, it said that customers affected by the floods on the island may contact Scoot for further assistance.
For bookings made through travel agents or partner airlines, the customers are advised to contact their travel agent or the purchasing airline directly for assistance.
“The safety of our customers and crew is our top priority.
“We will continue to closely monitor the situation in Bali and adjust our flights, where necessary,” an airline spokesperson said.
Rescuers are still pumping water out of several flooded buildings and around 500 military personnel have been deployed to clear streets of mud, debris and rocks.
“The peak of the rain has passed and generally the waters have receded. Now, we are focusing on clearing mud from the streets,” Abdul said.
Heavy rain also caused flooding in Indonesia’s East Nusa Tenggara where four people were killed.
Source: CNA
It was 2 a.m. in the ER, and I was slumped in a plastic chair in pajama pants still stained from birth, cradling my three-week-old. Olivia burned with fever, screaming until her voice went hoarse. My C-section scar throbbed. I whispered, “Shh, baby. Mommy’s here,” praying she’d last until a doctor came.
Across from us, a man in a razor-sharp suit waved his Rolex at the nurse. “We’re prioritizing that?” he sneered, pointing at me. “A single mom with a screaming kid? I pay for this system.” The nurse stayed calm. I kissed Olivia’s damp forehead and tried not to cry.
Then the double doors swung open. A doctor walked straight past him. “Baby with fever? Three weeks old? Follow me.” The man jumped up, clutching his chest. “I’ve had chest pain—could be a heart attack!” The doctor didn’t flinch. “You’re not pale, not sweating, no shortness of breath. My guess? Pulled a muscle golfing. This infant could have sepsis. She goes first. And if you speak to my staff like that again, I’ll walk you out myself.” The waiting room erupted in applause.
Hours later, Olivia’s fever broke. The nurse slipped me a bag of donations—diapers, wipes, a pink blanket, and a note: You’ve got this, Mama. When we finally walked out, my daughter sleeping against my chest, Mr. Rolex sat red-faced and silent. I looked right at him and smiled—not smug, just steady. A smile that said: