About Impact Fund Cases
Our litigation team fights in court for economic, racial, and social justice.
The Impact Fund pursues an active and diverse docket of impact civil rights cases. The cases we litigate seek to set right the harm caused by the worst excesses of corporate America and uncaring government. Our clients range from low-income tenants, to children, to LGBTQ+ service members.
Our Recent Cases:
-
![]()
Preserving the Head Start Program
Head Start Associations & Parent groups v. Department of Health and Human Services
Head Start is a U.S. government program that provide early childhood education, including health, nutrition, and family services.
Impact Fund and co-counsel are currently challenging the Trump administration’s attacks on this program in court.
On August 5, we argued that the court should stop the administration’s implementation of mass layoffs of Head Start staff and the ban on diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility within the Head Start program.
-
![]()
Guaranteeing Food Stamps
Erdmann-Browning v. Vilsack
In the past, government shutdowns meant that people would lose their food stamps (now called “SNAP benefits”) and go hungry.
In 2023, we sued the U.S. Department of Agriculture to change that.
In response to the lawsuit, the USDA committed to changing its accounting practice. Now, even if there is a government shutdown, the roughly 40 million people receiving SNAP benefits will continue to receive them throughout the month of October.
-
![]()
Fighting for LGBTQ+ Veterans
Farrell v. Department of Defense
Under the discriminatory “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, many LGBTQ+ service members were given less-than-honorable discharges from armed services due to their sexual orientation.
Even though “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was repealed, these veterans have faced discrimination from the complicated process of seeking discharge upgrades and the removing sexual orientation indicators on their discharge papers.
We sued the Department of Defense to alleviate some of these harms, and settled the lawsuit in 2025. The settlement will make it easier for LGBTQ+ veterans to correct their discharge records.
-
![]()
Defending Low-Income Tenants
U.S. ex rel. Terry v. Wasatch Advantage Group
Section 8 is a government program that pays for the housing of people with extremely low income. One corporate landlord, Wasatch Advantage Group, was allegedly charging additional illegal fees to over 2,000 of their tenants. When the low-income tenants couldn’t pay, they were threatened with eviction.
We successfully sued Wasatch for this practice, and in 2024, won recovery of all additional fees charged to over 2,000 tenants, as well as the interest that money would have accrued.
Past Cases:
During the COVID-19 Pandemic, Congress authorized the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which administers food stamps (“SNAP benefits”) in conjunction with state agencies, to issue additional payments to all households currently receiving SNAP benefits.
However, the USDA interpreted this authority in a way that deprives the households that receive the maximum SNAP benefits allowed from receiving any emergency assistance. These are the households with the lowest incomes, fewest resources, and greatest likelihood of hunger.
The Impact Fund and co-counsel sued the USDA for allegedly illegally denying emergency food aid to the poorest households in California.
Killian v. West Contra Costa Unified School District
In late 2016, the Contra Costa School District denied Walter Killian employment as a substitute custodian because of a 20-year-old conviction that he thought had been removed from his record. In January 2018, he sued the school district in state court to require it to comply with state and local law.
In 2019, Walter Killian (represented by Impact Fund and co-counsel) reached a landmark settlement with West Contra Costa Unified School District. Starting in June 2019, the District’s job application no longer asks about prior convictions. Instead, the District evaluates whether an applicant is qualified for the position before it considers criminal history.
Ellis v. Costco Wholesale Corp.
The Ellis v. Costco class action lawsuit was filed in 2004, challenging Costco’s practices of not promoting women into management positions. Our clients claimed that Costco operated a “glass ceiling” that stopped women from being promoted to assistant manager and general manager positions in the popular retail warehouses.
In September 2012, after years of litigation and appeals, the court certified the case as a nationwide class action, finding that the women had shown “significant proof of companywide policies and companywide gender disparities” and “discrete policies, practices, and culture which disfavored women.” In late 2013, the case was resolved on the eve of trial.