A long-simmering conflict over New York City’s “sanctuary” protections for immigrants escalated last week when the Trump administration, with the Department of Justice, filed a major federal lawsuit last Thursday suing New York City to overturn its sanctuary laws.
First established in the 1980s under Mayor Ed Koch, the city’s sanctuary laws prohibit city agencies, like the NYPD and the Department of Correction, from cooperating with federal ICE agents. They include measures, for instance, that prohibit the turning over of an individual to ICE unless those agents have a judicial warrant and the person has been convicted of a serious crime within the last five years.
Defendants include New York City, Mayor Eric Adams, City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams, the New York Police Department, Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch and correction commissioners. Here’s what you need to know.
The timing of the lawsuit:. The filing of the suit last Thursday in Federal District Court in Brooklyn suggests the case was in response to an incident the prior weekend, when an off-duty U.S. Border Patrol officer was shot in Manhattan, allegedly by an undocumented migrant. The suit directly mentions the incident high up, stating: “But for New York City’s sanctuary policies, this tragedy could have been avoided.”
Also Read: ICE May Still Have Massive Access to Rikers Island Data Despite City’s Sanctuary Status
The administration’s argument: The DOJ asserts that NYC’s laws are illegal and violate federal law’s priority over local laws. The administration also argues these policies dangerously obstruct federal immigration enforcement and impact public safety.
The suit quotes Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who said: “How many more lives will it take, how many more people have to be hurt and victimized before we have public safety be a number on priority in some of our largest cities?”
It also states: “The challenged provisions of New York City law reflect the City’s intentional effort to obstruct the United States’ enforcement of federal immigration law, by (among much else) impeding the consultation and communication between federal and local law enforcement officials that is necessary for the United States to enforce the law and keep Americans safe.”
The city’s argument: Those in favor of sanctuary policies argue they actually make cities safer.
Rendy Desamours, a spokesperson for City Council Speaker Adams, said: “[Attorney General] Pam Bondi may want to distract from reality, but the facts are clear: the evidence consistently shows that cities with sanctuary laws are safer than those without them. When residents feel comfortable reporting crime and cooperating with local law enforcement, we are all safer, something both Republican and Democratic mayors of New York City have recognized.”
After Thursday’s suit, Murad Awawdeh, president of the New York Immigration Coalition, released a statement where he called the suit “frivolous at best, and an attack on New York’s ability to govern itself at worst.”
“When local police focus on protecting our neighborhoods rather than carrying out the federal government’s mass disappearance agenda, every New Yorker can feel secure enough to report crimes, access emergency services, and cooperate with investigations without fear of deportation,” said Awawdeh in the statement.
A complicated wrinkle: Adams, a defendant, has also been a vocal critic of the city’s sanctuary laws. In response to the suit, a spokesperson from his office said that the mayor believes that they “go too far” when dealing with “violent criminals.” Adams has previously attempted to increase cooperation with ICE but was blocked by the City Council, creating significant internal conflict within the city’s leadership.
Indicators of what comes next? The Trump administration had previously filed suits against the sanctuary policies in four cities in New Jersey (Newark, Jersey City, Paterson and Hoboken) in May, Los Angeles in June, and Illinois and Chicago in February. A federal judge just dismissed the administration’s case against Chicago on Friday, ruling that Illinois’ decision to enact sanctuary laws was protected by the 10th Amendment, which outlines how power not given to the federal government or denied to the states is retained by the states.
“This ruling affirms what we have long known: that Chicago’s welcoming city ordinance is lawful and supports public safety. The city cannot be compelled to cooperate with the Trump administration’s reckless and inhumane immigration agenda,” the office of Chicago’s Mayor Brandon Johnson, said in a statement.
Meanwhile, Adams said Friday that Trump couldn’t just issue an executive order rolling back New York City’s sanctuary city policies, reaffirming: “Any modification in the law must come through the City Council.”
