Original Date Announced

Section 17 of Executive Order (EO) 14159, "Protecting the American People Against Invasion" directs DOJ and DHS to ensure "sanctuary jurisdictions" do not receive Federal funding. Section 17 also directs DOJ and DHS to "evaluate and undertake any other lawful actions, criminal or civil, that they deem warranted based on any such jurisdiction’s practices that interfere with the enforcement of Federal law."

Trump 2.0 [ID # 1391]

Subsequent Trump and Court Action

2025.01.26 Complaint - Organized Communities Against Deportations v. Trump

Just Futures Law and co-counsel filed a lawsuit on behalf of four grassroots organizations in Chicago challenging the administration’s planned immigration raids targeting Chicago as a "sanctuary city." Organized Communities Against Deportation v. Trump, No. 1:25-cv-00868 (N.D. Ill.). On January 26, 2025, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, which is the version included here.

**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

2025.02.06 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. See litigation note above**

Subsequent Trump and Court Action

2025.02.07 Complaint - San Francisco v. Trump

Several jurisdictions—City and County of San Francisco, Santa Clara County, Portland, King County, and New Haven—sued President Trump alleging that EO 14159, as well as the related DOJ memo threatening withholding of federal funding to sanctuary cities, are unconstitutional and violate federal law. San Francisco v. Trump, No. 3:25-cv-01350 (N.D. Cal.).

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

Subsequent Trump and Court Action

Eric Adams releases updated ICE guidance after backlash

In the context of direct pressure from Border Czar Tom Homan, NYC Mayor Eric Adams' administration distributed a memo to migrant shelter operators on February 4, 2025, instructing them to allow ICE in without a warrant if at any point workers feel reasonably threatened "or fear for your safety or the safety of others around you." Previous city guidance was that nonprofit shelter operators should not allow ICE agents entry without a warrant signed by a judge "except in exigent circumstances." The memo says that it took effect on January 13. See https://hellgatenyc.com/new-memo-ice-adams/.

On February 10, 2025, Mayor Adams released additional guidance clarifying the January 13 memo. The memo was criticized, especially by the City Council which had threatened legal action. The administration presented a flow chart for action that omitted any reference to "fear." Instead, the presentations reportedly suggested that "[w]hile employees can verbally deny access to federal agents without a judicial warrant, they should not interfere with any actions of law enforcement personnel should officers decide to come in anyway."

For additional Adams actions, see https://immpolicytracking.org/policies/eo-securing-our-borders-2f-promotes-federal-state-partnerships-to-enforce-federal-immigration-priorities/

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

2025.02.23 Complaint - Chelsea v. Trump

Lawyers for Civil Rights filed suit on behalf of Chelsea and Somerville, MA, claiming that federal efforts to withhold funding would "violate the U.S. Constitution" and inhibit "efforts to enhance the safety of their own communities through well-considered law enforcement efforts and policy judgments." The lawsuit asks for Section 17 of Executive Order 14159, as well as several follow-on DOJ orders, to be declared unconstitutional, and to enjoin the Administration from proceeding "in furtherance of any withholding or conditioning of federal funds based on the Executive Order." City of Chelsea v. Trump, No. 1:25-cv-10442 (D. Mass.)

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

Subsequent Trump and Court Action

2025.02.26 Voluntary Dismissal - Organized Communities Against Deportations v. Trump

Organized Communities Against Deportations and the other plaintiffs moved to voluntarily dismiss their lawsuit against the Trump administration. The plaintiffs point to ongoing immigration raids in the Chicago area, as well as the federal government's suit against Illinois, Chicago, and Cook County over sanctuary policies, as their reasons for seeking dismissal. Organized Communities Against Deportations v. Trump, No. 1:25-cv-00868 (N.D. Ill.).

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

Subsequent Trump and Court Action

2025.03.06 DOJ - U.S. Attorneys' Offices Staffing Priorities

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche issues a memorandum on “U.S. Attorneys' Offices Staffing Priorities,” setting forth guidance ensure U.S. Attorneys’ Offices are appropriately staffed to address the administration’s immigration and crime priorities. The memo identifies Border Districts which are authorized to hire AUSAs despite the federal hiring freeze, including all Districts in Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, and Florida as well as the Southern District of California, Western and Northern Districts of New York, and the District of Vermont. The memo states this policy is critical to the implementation of EO 14159, specifically with regard to addressing “unlawful impediments to President Trump's immigration policy” by “state and local law enforcement, as well as misguided advocacy groups operating against the public interest.”

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

2025.04.24 Preliminary Injunction - San Francisco v. Trump

The District Court for the Northern District of California issued a preliminary injunction in San Francisco v. Trump. The Court stated that the government is enjoined from "taking any action to withhold, freeze, or condition federal funds from the Cities and Counties based on

(1) the first sentence of Section 17 of Executive Order 14159,

(2) Section 2(a)(ii) of Executive Order 14218;

(3) the Preamble and Section I of the February 5, 2025 Memorandum from the Attorney General entitled 'Sanctuary Jurisdictions Directives' on the basis that the Cities and Counties have policies that limit: (i) the honoring of civil immigration detainer requests; (ii) cooperation with administrative warrants for purposes of immigration enforcement; (iii) sharing of information with federal immigration authorities other than immigration or citizenship status; (iv) the use of local law enforcement to arrest or detain individuals solely for civil immigration violations; or (v) the use of local resources to assist with civil immigration enforcement activities."

San Francisco v. Trump, No. 3:25-cv-01350 (N.D. Cal.).

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

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**