Original Date Announced

Section III of AG Bondi's "Sanctuary Jurisdiction Directives" memorandum directs Department of Justice (DOJ) officials to investigate incidents in which State and local actors "impede, obstruct, or otherwise fail to comply with lawful immigration-related directives pursuant to the President's Article II authority to ensure national security, the Immigration and Nationality Act, or other authorities." DOJ is then instructed to bring prosecutions for, for instance, failure to comply with 18 U.S.C. § 371 and 8 U.S.C. §§ 1324 and 1373; declination decisions (i.e., decisions not to prosecute) must be treated as Urgent Reports pursuant to Justice Manual § 1-13.130.

DOJ's Civil Division is also instructed to coordinate with the Sanctuary Cities Enforcement Working Group to identify "state and local laws, policies, and practices that facilitate violations of federal immigration laws or impede lawful federal immigration operations," and "where appropriate . . . take legal action to challenge such laws, policies, or practices."

Trump 2.0 [ID #1531]

Subsequent Trump and Court Action

2025.02.06 Complaint - United States v. State of Illinois

The United States filed a lawsuit against the State of Illinois and others, including the city and mayor of Chicago, arguing that their sanctuary laws/policies obstruct and unlawfully impede the enforcement of federal immigration laws. United States v. Illinois, No. 1-25-cv-01285 (N.D. Ill.).

**Link to case here. Our litigation entries generally report only the initial complaint and any major substantive filings or decisions. For additional information, CourtListener provides access to PACER and all available pleadings. Other sites that track litigation in more detail or organize cases by topic include Civil Rights Clearinghouse, Justice Action Center, National Immigration Litigation Alliance, and Just Security**

Subsequent Trump and Court Action

2025.02.12 Complaint - United States v. State of New York

The DOJ filed a suit against New York State as part of its crackdown on sanctuary jurisdictions. The lawsuit challenges the legality of New York's "Green Light Law," which, according to the complaint, "bars the sharing of New York State Department of Motor Vehicles (“DMV”) records or information . . . with federal immigration agencies." United States v. State of New York, No. 1:25-cv-00205 (N.D.N.Y.).

**Link to case here. See litigation note above**

Subsequent Trump and Court Action

2025.04.11 Reported: New Jersey AUSA investigates Governor and AG over noncooperation policy - NYT

​The New York Times reports that Alina Habba, interim U.S. Attorney for New Jersey, is investigating New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy and Attorney General Matt Platkin over their statewide Immigrant Trust Directive, which took effect in 2019 and limits the types of voluntary assistance the police, prosecutors, and correction officers may provide federal immigration authorities. Habba warned during an interview that anyone who "gets 'in the way'" of federal deportation efforts could face charges of obstruction and concealment.

Subsequent Trump and Court Action

2025.04.24 Complaint - United States v. City of Rochester

The United States filed a lawsuit against the City of Rochester and others, including the city council and mayor, arguing that their sanctuary laws/policies, General Order 502 and Training Bulletin No. P-75-1, obstruct and unlawfully impede the enforcement of federal immigration laws. United States v. City of Rochester, No. 6:25-cv-06226 (W.D.N.Y).

**Link to case here. See litigation note above**

Subsequent Trump and Court Action

2025.04.25 Reported: US charges Milwaukee judge with obstructing immigration arrest in Trump crackdown - Reuters

Federal officials arrested Judge Hannah Dugan of the Milwaukee County circuit court for "obstructing a government proceeding and concealing an individual to prevent arrest." In the criminal complaint, DOJ alleges Judge Dugan "hindered the immigration agents who showed up to arrest" a man appearing in her courtroom by allowing the man "to exit through a jury door." Judge Dugan allegedly confronted the immigration agents at the court, telling them "they needed a judicial warrant to arrest someone inside the courthouse." The man was later arrested by the agents outside.

Subsequent Trump and Court Action

2025.05.02 Complaint - United States v. Colorado

The United States filed suit against the State of Colorado, the City and County of Denver, and various officials, challenging Colorado’s “Sanctuary Laws” as unconstitutional. The litigation references Colorado laws prohibiting information sharing and limiting cooperation between state and local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities. The suit alleges that the laws violate the Supremacy Clause by obstructing federal immigration enforcement, by unlawfully discriminating against federal officials, and by directly regulating federal government activities. The complaint seeks declaratory and injunctive relief to block enforcement of the challenged laws. United States v. Colorado, No. 1:25-cv-01391 (D. Colo.).

**Link to case here. See litigation note above**

Subsequent Trump and Court Action

2025.05.22 Complaint - United States v. City of Newark

The United States filed a lawsuit against the cities of Newark, Jersey City, Paterson, and Hoboken in New Jersey, as well as their elected officials, arguing that their sanctuary policies obstruct and unlawfully impede the enforcement of federal immigration laws. United States v. City of Newark, No. 2:25-cv-05081 (D.N.J.).

**Link to case here. See litigation note above**

Subsequent Trump and Court Action

2025.06.12 Complaint - United States v. State of New York

The DOJ filed suit against the state of New York and its elected officials, challenging New York's Protect Our Courts Act and two state executive orders under the Supremacy Clause. The Protect Our Courts Act makes it a crime to conduct civil immigration arrests of noncitizens at or on their way to or from a courthouse without a warrant. The challenged executive orders further prohibit civil immigration arrests of individuals within all state facilities and prohibit certain information sharing between state employees and federal officers. The suit alleges that the laws “pose intolerable obstacles to federal immigration enforcement and directly regulate and discriminate against the Federal Government." United States v. State of New York, No. 1:25-cv-00744 (N.D.N.Y.).

**Link to case here. See litigation note above**

Subsequent Trump and Court Action

2025.06.30 Complaint - United States v. City of Los Angeles

The DOJ filed suit against the City of Los Angeles over a 2024 city ordinance titled “Prohibition of the Use of City Resources for Federal Immigration Enforcement.” The ordinance prevents city personnel and property from being used to assist federal immigration agents in investigations, arrests, or detentions related to immigration enforcement. The suit alleges that the ordinance unlawfully regulates and discriminates against the federal government in violation of the Supremacy Clause, and is preempted by federal immigration law. United States v. City of Los Angeles, No. 2:25-cv-05917 (C.D. Cal.).

**Link to case here. See litigation note above**