Trump and DOJ Threaten Sanctuary Jurisdictions

DOJ to Investigate Noncompliance with Trump Immigration Policy

In a memo, the DOJ states that it will investigate state or local actors for potential criminal prosecution who they deem are obstructing or non-complying with ICE enforcement operations.

This is specifically aimed at officials who speak out against Trump’s new policies and officials in sanctuary jurisdictions. Trump has already denied federal funding to sanctuary jurisdictions which he claims “seek to interfere with the lawful exercise of Federal law enforcement operations” (see EO 14159).

The DOJ’s Civil Division will also work to identify and challenge in court any local laws or policies that are deemed to be inconsistent with Trump’s new immigration policies.

Sanctuary Jurisdictions and Policy

While having no official legal definition, sanctuary jurisdictions are cities, counties or states that enact a wide range of policies to limit or define the extent to which local governments share information or law enforcement collaborates with federal immigration operations.

These policies are unique to each sanctuary jurisdiction and can take a variety of forms.

Some policy examples include:

• Limiting the ability of local police to make arrests and keep individuals in custody for ICE

• Preventing local police from participating directly in ICE enforcement operations (“287(g)” agreements)

• Prohibiting local governments from detaining individuals for ICE.

Risk to Noncitizens and Officials in Sanctuary Jurisidictions

Sanctuary policies do not hide or necessarily protect undocumented noncitizens from ICE as the DOJ memo insinuates. ICE can still carry out enforcement operations in those jurisdictions, they just might not benefit from full collaboration with local governments or police.

Noncitizens in sanctuary jurisdictions are very much still at risk from ICE operations which threaten their fundamental human rights. State officials who have pushed back against Trump's problematic immigration policies and refuse to collaborate are also now at risk of potential prosecution.

Noncitizens and citizens alike benefit from federally funded essential services offered within sanctuary jurisdictions, such as healthcare, education, public safety, and social services. Trump’s order to deny funding to sanctuary jurisdictions puts these services in jeopardy and unnecessarily burdens entire communities.

While the Lemkin Institute continues to report on important immigration policy changes, we cannot offer individualized legal advice.

If you think you may be affected by policy changes, please contact an immigration lawyer.