NEW YORK — In a significant escalation of tensions regarding immigration policy, the U.S. Department of Justice declared on Thursday that it has initiated a lawsuit against New York City and Mayor Eric Adams, contesting the city’s “sanctuary” policies that restrict collaboration with federal immigration authorities.
The lawsuit, filed in the Eastern District of New York, alleges that the city is hindering federal law enforcement by declining to comply with immigration detainers and other requests from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The Justice Department contends that New York’s actions breach the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which asserts that federal law supersedes state and local regulations.
“New York City has released thousands of criminals on the streets to commit violent crimes against law-abiding citizens due to sanctuary city policies,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi in a strongly worded statement. “If New York City won’t stand up for the safety of its citizens, we will.”
Assistant Attorney General Brett Shumate echoed the sentiment, accusing the city of leading a national effort to defy federal immigration enforcement. “Its efforts to thwart federal immigration enforcement end now,” he said.
The lawsuit targets Mayor Adams along with various city officials, and is part of a larger initiative by the Justice Department to contest sanctuary policies nationwide. In the last three months, similar legal actions have been initiated against cities such as Los Angeles, Colorado, Illinois, New York State, Rochester, and multiple towns in New Jersey. Additionally, the Justice Department takes credit for the recent annulment of Louisville’s sanctuary policy following threats of legal repercussions.
Officials in New York City have yet to make a public statement regarding the lawsuit, but the city has consistently upheld its sanctuary position as vital for safeguarding immigrant communities, building trust with law enforcement, and ensuring public safety.
Legal analysts foresee a prominent legal confrontation on the horizon, which could have considerable consequences for the distribution of authority between federal and local governments concerning immigration enforcement.
Further updates are anticipated as the case unfolds. Read DOJ compliant
