Editorial credit: Joshua Sukoff / Shutterstock.com

The Trump Justice Department has filed a federal lawsuit against New York City and Mayor Eric Adams, alleging that sanctuary city policies obstruct federal immigration enforcement. The legal action heightens tensions over states’ rights and public safety.

By Mary Campbell

New York: On July 24, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice under President Donald Trump filed a high-stakes lawsuit against New York City, accusing the Adams administration of undermining federal immigration enforcement through its longstanding sanctuary policies.

The 37-page complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, argues that the city’s laws restricting cooperation between local and federal authorities violate the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The Justice Department seeks a permanent injunction to block enforcement of those local laws.

“If New York’s leaders won’t step up to protect their citizens, we will,” said U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi in a press release Thursday afternoon.

Sanctuary Policies Under Fire

New York’s sanctuary city policies—many of which have been in place since the 1980s—limit the extent to which local law enforcement can collaborate with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The DOJ alleges that these restrictions have resulted in the release of undocumented individuals who were subject to ICE detainers.

The lawsuit names multiple city entities as defendants, including the New York City Council and the Department of Correction. It cites specific examples of detainer requests that the city allegedly failed to honor, claiming these refusals jeopardize public safety.

Political Fallout and Partisan Divide

This legal challenge marks a dramatic shift in the already tense relationship between the Trump administration and Mayor Eric Adams. Though Adams and Trump had previously found rare common ground on certain public safety initiatives, the lawsuit signals a clear fracture.

Curtis Sliwa, Republican mayoral candidate and founder of the Guardian Angels, voiced full support for the federal action. He used the occasion to lambast Mayor Adams for not repealing sanctuary policies despite what he claims are rising threats to New Yorkers.

“This lawsuit is long overdue and underscores the failure of leadership in City Hall,” Sliwa stated. “Eric Adams had two clear opportunities to put sanctuary city laws on the ballot and let New Yorkers decide, but he refused. Meanwhile, the City Council continues to ignore legislation introduced by my colleagues in the Common Sense Caucus that would repeal these laws and protect public safety.”

Immigrant Rights Groups Push Back

Immigrant advocacy organizations were quick to denounce the lawsuit, arguing that sanctuary laws make cities safer by encouraging undocumented residents to cooperate with law enforcement without fear of deportation.

Murad Awawdeh, President and CEO of the New York Immigration Coalition, issued a strong rebuke of the DOJ’s legal challenge:

“Immigrants have built and rebuilt New York City and this nation for centuries, and our local government has correctly welcomed and embraced them as essential members of our New York community,” Awawdeh said.

“Unfortunately, Donald Trump thinks that he and he alone can decide our country’s local laws—undermining the 10th Amendment. Today’s lawsuit is frivolous at best, and an attack on New York’s ability to govern itself at worst. Mayor Adams must fight back against this federal overreach and defend the well-being of all New Yorkers.”

Context and Constitutional Questions

The lawsuit reignites the longstanding constitutional debate over federalism and states’ rights. While the federal government holds exclusive authority over immigration policy, sanctuary jurisdictions argue that the 10th Amendment protects their right not to enforce federal mandates.

Legal scholars suggest that the outcome of this case could set a precedent for how much autonomy municipalities have in shaping their immigration-related practices. The litigation also underscores the political and ideological battleground that sanctuary policies represent in national discourse.

The term “sanctuary city” has no uniform legal definition and its implementation varies across jurisdictions. In New York City, the policies primarily serve to limit local police cooperation with ICE, particularly when no judicial warrant is present.

What Comes Next?

With the complaint now filed, New York City has a limited window to respond in court. Mayor Adams has yet to issue a formal statement on the lawsuit, but pressure is mounting from both sides of the aisle.

If the federal court sides with the DOJ, it could force sweeping changes in how the city handles immigration enforcement. However, if New York prevails, it would reaffirm the legal foundation of sanctuary policies and embolden similar jurisdictions nationwide.

In the midst of an election year, this case has become a flashpoint in the national debate over immigration, public safety, and the limits of executive power.

  #10thAmendment, #BrooklynFederalCourt, #curtissliwa, #DOJLawsuit, #DonaldTrump, #EricAdams, #Federalism, #ImmigrationLaw, #MuradAwawdeh, #NewYorkPolitics, #nycnews, #PamBondi, #PublicSafety, #SanctuaryCities, ICE