Judge dismisses Trump admin lawsuit over Illinois sanctuary policies


This recording was made using enhanced software.

Summary

Trump administration sues Illinois

The Trump administration sued the city of Chicago and state of Illinois over their policies restricting how much local law enforcement can work with federal immigration authorities.

Federal judge dismisses lawsuit

A federal judge in Illinois dismissed the lawsuit, citing protections from the Tenth Amendment. Department of Justice officials still have the opportunity to appeal the ruling.

Local officials praise ruling

Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson said in statements that the ruling affirms that their policies are lawful. "We will continue to fight for the dignity of our immigrant, migrant and refugee communities," Johnson said.


Full story

A federal judge on Friday, July 25, dismissed the Trump administration’s lawsuit against the city Chicago and state of Illinois over their sanctuary policies. District Court Judge Lindsay Jenkins said in her ruling that the United States “lacks standing” to sue.

“The Sanctuary Policies reflect Defendants’ decision to not participate in enforcing civil immigration law — a decision protected by the Tenth Amendment and not preempted by the [Immigration and Nationality Act]” Jenkins wrote. “Finding that these same Policy provisions constitute discrimination or impermissible regulation would provide an end-run around the Tenth Amendment. It would allow the federal government to commandeer States under the guise of intergovernmental immunity — the exact type of direct regulation of states barred by the Tenth Amendment.”

Along with Illinois, Attorney General Pam Bondi and the Department of Justice have also taken legal action against other sanctuary communities since the president’s second term started. In their lawsuit against Illinois, they wrote that “the minimally enforcing — and oftentimes affirmatively thwarting — federal immigration laws over a period of years has resulted in countless criminals being released.”

But Jenkins wrote that the sanctuary policies “do not comparably regulate ICE operations
or meddle with the contractual rights of private individuals working with ICE.”

“Importantly, they leave open ICE’s ability to obtain and present a criminal warrant, thereby receiving the assistance and information it seeks,” she said.

Gov. JB Pritzker on social media celebrated Jenkins’ decision.

“Illinois just beat the Trump Administration in federal court. Their case challenging the bipartisan TRUST Act was dismissed — unlike the President, we follow the law and listen to the courts,” Pritzker said. The TRUST Act, signed in 2017, restricted local law enforcement’s ability to work with federal immigration authorities, and upheld an Illinois court ruling that immigration detainer orders from ICE are illegal.

“Illinois’ TRUST Act acknowledges that civil immigration enforcement is the responsibility of the federal government, and that state and local law enforcement resources are most appropriately utilized protecting the communities in which they serve,” Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul said in a statement.

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson said the ruling affirms “what we have long known: that Chicago’s Welcoming City Ordinance is lawful and supports public safety” adding, “we will continue to fight for the dignity of our immigrant, migrant and refugee communities and stand up for the rights of all Chicagoans against any federal overreach.”

Edwin C. Yohnka, director of communications and public policy at the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois, said the court was correct to reject the lawsuit.

“The Constitution permits state and local government to determine local priorities without interference from the federal government,” Yohnka wrote. “The ruling pushes back against the President’s belief that he can unilaterally dictate that all government entities participate in his destructive and increasingly unpopular mass deportation program.”

The federal government still has the opportunity to appeal the ruling.

Trump administration sues New York City

Just days before the Illinois ruling came down, the Department of Justice sued New York City, claiming their sanctuary laws are also a barrier to federal authorities’ ability to enforce immigration laws.

“New York City has long been at the vanguard of interfering with enforcing the country’s immigration laws. Its history as a sanctuary city dates back to 1989, and its efforts to thwart federal immigration enforcement have only intensified,” the complaint by the DOJ said.

In response, NYC Mayor Eric Adams said he will “will review the lawsuit.”

“We support the essence of the local laws put in place by the City Council — but I have also been clear that they go too far when it comes to dealing with those violent criminals on our streets and have urged the Council to reexamine them to ensure we can effectively work with the federal government to make our city safer,” Adams wrote in a statement on X. “So far, the Council has refused.”

Meanwhile, the city council said “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.”

Tags: , , , ,

SAN provides
Unbiased. Straight Facts.

Don’t just take our word for it.


Certified balanced reporting

According to media bias experts at AllSides

AllSides Certified Balanced May 2025

Transparent and credible

Awarded a perfect reliability rating from NewsGuard

100/100

Welcome back to trustworthy journalism.

Find out more

Why this story matters

A federal court decision upholds the rights of Illinois and Chicago to set local law enforcement priorities without federal interference, maintaining separation between federal immigration enforcement and local governance.

States’ rights

The court's ruling reaffirms states' autonomy under the Tenth Amendment to determine local policies without being commandeered by federal directives.

Immigration enforcement

The story centers on the limits of local governments' involvement in federal civil immigration law, allowing local officials to prioritize community safety over federal enforcement demands.

Judicial checks and balances

The court’s decision demonstrates the judiciary’s role in reviewing and sometimes limiting federal government actions to ensure constitutional boundaries are respected.

Get the big picture

Context corner

Sanctuary policies have been in place in Chicago for decades. These policies aim to balance local authority with federal immigration enforcement while building trust within immigrant communities.

Debunking

There is no conclusive evidence that sanctuary policies lead to increased crime. Studies referenced by several sources suggest that such jurisdictions may actually be safer and experience similar or lower crime rates than non-sanctuary areas.

History lesson

Attempts to challenge sanctuary policies in court also occurred during President Donald Trump's first term, with courts consistently ruling in favor of local and state autonomy citing the Tenth Amendment.

SAN provides
Unbiased. Straight Facts.

Don’t just take our word for it.


Certified balanced reporting

According to media bias experts at AllSides

AllSides Certified Balanced May 2025

Transparent and credible

Awarded a perfect reliability rating from NewsGuard

100/100

Welcome back to trustworthy journalism.

Find out more

Bias comparison

  • Media outlets on the left frame the dismissed Trump administration lawsuit as a decisive rebuke of a "reckless and inhumane" immigration agenda, highlighting sanctuary policies as vital for public safety and immigrant trust, often using emotionally charged terms like “crushing legal blow.”
  • Not enough unique coverage from media outlets in the center to provide a bias comparison.
  • Media outlets on the right emphasize sanctuary policies as “havens for criminal illegal immigrants” and portray local officials as obstructing federal law enforcement, with strategic labeling such as “Biden judge” to suggest partisan bias in the ruling.

Media landscape

Click on bars to see headlines

127 total sources

Key points from the Left

  • A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit from the Trump administration that aimed to disrupt Chicago's cooperation limits with federal immigration agents, ruling the government lacks standing to sue local officials.
  • Judge Lindsay Jenkins ruled that Illinois' sanctuary policies are protected by the Tenth Amendment and do not discriminate against federal immigration enforcement.
  • Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson stated that the ruling affirms the lawfulness of the Welcoming City Ordinance, contributing to public safety.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Center

  • On Friday, United States District Judge Lindsay C. Jenkins dismissed the Justice Department's lawsuit against Illinois, Chicago and Cook County.
  • During the early days of President Donald Trump’s term, the administration launched legal challenges against Democratic-led jurisdictions with sanctuary measures, arguing they violated the Supremacy Clause.
  • According to Jenkins, the Justice Department failed to show a federal-law violation and noted the Tenth Amendment protects sanctuary policies.
  • Following the dismissal, city officials and leaders praised their sanctuary measures as lawful.
  • According to the Justice Department, similar actions have targeted Los Angeles and New York City and officials could face prosecution.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Right

  • A federal judge dismissed the Trump administration's lawsuit against Illinois and Chicago regarding sanctuary policies that limit immigration enforcement cooperation.
  • Judge Lindsay Jenkins ruled that state and local sanctuary measures are protected by the Tenth Amendment, which prevents federal overreach.
  • Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson expressed satisfaction, stating the ruling supports public safety and the city's Welcoming City Ordinance is lawful.

Report an issue with this summary

Other (sources without bias rating):

Powered by Ground News™

Daily Newsletter

Start your day with fact-based news

Start your day with fact-based news

Learn more about our emails. Unsubscribe anytime.

By entering your email, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.