The tragic failures of the federal response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005, which led to countless preventable deaths, spurred Congress to act. Their goal: ensure such devastating missteps would never happen again.
This led to the creation of a landmark law, designed to empower the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s leader with greater authority while imposing crucial limitations on the Homeland Security Secretary, who oversees FEMA.
The legislation was a direct response to anxieties that FEMA’s core mission of disaster relief was being overshadowed by broader security objectives, emphasizing the need for the FEMA administrator to independently manage crucial funding and staffing decisions.
However, two decades on, the very spirit of that law — the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act — seems to be under strain. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has reportedly maintained a tight grip, extensively micromanaging FEMA’s personnel, initiatives, and financial allocations.
Concerns are mounting among FEMA staff and emergency management professionals, who fear Secretary Noem’s actions are undermining the intent, if not the explicit text, of the post-Katrina reforms. Whistleblowers have even come forward, cautioning that these changes are leaving FEMA dangerously unprepared for future crises.
In response to these growing concerns, Victoria Barton, a senior FEMA spokeswoman, issued a statement asserting that FEMA is ‘operating lawfully and in full compliance’ with the post-Katrina reform law.
Ms. Barton further clarified, stating that ‘The secretary of homeland security has clear statutory and delegated authority to manage the Department, including decisions related to staffing, grants and program oversight.’
While some of Secretary Noem’s policy shifts have been successfully challenged in court by states, unions, and advocacy organizations, legal experts acknowledge that the 2006 statute itself is notoriously challenging to enforce effectively.
Evidence, including internal FEMA documents obtained by The New York Times and interviews with agency employees, suggests that Secretary Noem has taken a hands-on approach to modifying FEMA’s staffing levels and overall operational capacity.
One notable example occurred last month when the agency terminated contracts for hundreds of disaster workers. Before this, supervisors were reportedly instructed to seek contract extensions via a new approval channel that bypassed established FEMA leadership, routing requests directly through Secretary Noem’s office.
Government worker unions have responded by filing a lawsuit against FEMA over these dismissals, moving this month to demand a judge halt the firings. Their core argument hinges on the claim that these actions directly contravene the ‘plain language’ of the post-Katrina law, which explicitly forbids the Secretary from undermining FEMA’s inherent authority.
However, in a response filed on Friday, the government maintained that the law remains unbroken, asserting that ‘FEMA’s functions continue unaltered, regardless of the number of employees they have performing them.’
Further stoking concerns, Secretary Noem recently alarmed FEMA personnel by implementing new restrictions on their travel to and from disaster zones. According to documents obtained by The Times, all such travel now requires written approval from homeland security officials. The agency attributed this to the impact of a partial government shutdown on the Homeland Security Department, despite FEMA’s disaster operations being funded by a separate, dedicated fund, not general government appropriations.
Last year, Secretary Noem mandated that her office approve any FEMA expenditure exceeding $100,000. A review of disaster aid projects by The New York Times revealed billions of dollars in delayed spending, all pending her personal sign-off. During a recent House oversight hearing, when questioned about this backlog, Gregg Phillips, who heads FEMA’s disaster response, stated that the agency ‘can’t go any faster’ to clear it.
Abby McIlraith, a FEMA emergency management specialist, voiced profound concern, stating, ‘I’m extremely concerned about how this law is being violated right now by Secretary Noem and others.’ McIlraith herself was placed on administrative leave after publicly signing a letter last August warning that FEMA was at risk of repeating the catastrophic errors of Katrina.
An image from August 2005 shows thick smoke rising from an industrial fire in downtown New Orleans, just days after Hurricane Katrina devastated the city.
According to three former FEMA lawyers interviewed by The New York Times, while FEMA’s operational capacity may indeed have waned under Secretary Noem, proving a legal violation of the Post-Katrina Act is a complex matter. Two of these lawyers chose to remain anonymous, citing restrictions on speaking to the media in their current positions.
These legal experts suggested that states *could* hypothetically sue FEMA for purported legal breaches if they could demonstrate the agency’s failure to perform its mandated duties during a crisis. Additionally, Congress possesses the power to initiate oversight hearings to investigate potential violations.
However, the law, while prohibiting the Homeland Security Secretary from undermining FEMA’s ‘authorities, responsibilities or functions,’ grants considerable flexibility to administrations regarding staffing levels and organizational structure. Adrian Sevier, who was FEMA’s chief counsel for ten years until his resignation in February 2025, noted that the law does not specify whether ‘a one-person office or a 1,000-person office’ is required to fulfill certain duties.
Mr. Sevier concluded, ‘It’s unfortunate, it’s bad government — you can make all those arguments. There’s really nothing unlawful about it, in my opinion.’
The Post-Katrina Act also mandates that the FEMA administrator possess substantial emergency management experience. Curiously, none of the three officials who have served in this role on an acting basis over the past year have met this qualification. Ms. Barton, the FEMA spokeswoman, stated this practice is ‘consistent with federal law.’
The position of FEMA administrator requires Senate confirmation, yet a year into his second term, President Trump has still not put forward a nominee.
Federal statutes, including the post-Katrina reforms, obligate FEMA to bolster states’ own disaster management capabilities. Despite a federal judge siding with states in a lawsuit against FEMA over access to vital emergency preparedness grants, some states are still awaiting the funds legally due to them.
Pete Gaynor, who served as FEMA administrator during President Trump’s first term, highlighted that homeland security secretaries wield considerable power over grant programs. He recounted an instance from his time as an emergency manager in Providence, R.I., when the Obama administration informed his city it no longer qualified for funding through FEMA’s Urban Areas Security Initiative program.
Mr. Gaynor noted the lack of recourse in such situations, stating, ‘There’s really nothing you can do about it.’ He added that Secretary Noem ‘has a pretty high ability to manage those grants the way she sees fit.’
During the drafting of the 2006 law, intense debate surrounded the question of whether FEMA should regain its independent agency status, a position it held prior to the creation of the Homeland Security Department in 2003.
Ultimately, lawmakers opted for a different path, choosing to pass a law that, as explained by its sponsors, Senators Susan Collins (Republican of Maine) and Joseph Lieberman (Democrat of Connecticut) in a 2008 letter, ‘elevated it within D.H.S. and provided the administrator direct access to the president in emergencies.’
Senator Collins was unavailable for comment regarding the law or FEMA’s current state under Secretary Noem. Senator Lieberman passed away in 2024.
Mr. Sevier emphasized that as enacted, the law effectively retained substantial control over FEMA within the Homeland Security Department. ‘Congress was unwilling to remove FEMA from the department,’ he stated, concluding that, consequently, the post-Katrina law ‘doesn’t really do a whole lot.’