DOJ sues Colorado, Denver for so-called ‘sanctuary laws'
DENVER (KDVR) — The U.S. Department of Justice is suing the state of Colorado and the city of Denver for laws and statutes the federal government says are 'sanctuary laws.'
The federal government alleges in its lawsuit, filed in Colorado District Court on Friday, that the laws are designed to 'interfere with and discriminate against the Federal Government's enforcement of federal immigration law.'
FOX31 Newsletters: Sign up to get breaking news sent to your inbox
The lawsuit specifically mentions the troubled Aurora apartment complexes that went viral after a video showing armed men in a stairwell was first reported on by FOX31's Vicente Arenas. The men in the video were later connected to Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang that's been publicized during recent immigration efforts under President Donald Trump.
The lawsuit argues that federal immigration law preempts state law. Colorado has a law that prevents local law enforcement from enforcing federal immigration law, among other things, and it has been decried by many law enforcement advocates and at least three members of U.S. Congress.
'But the Sanctuary Laws were enacted for the sole purpose of impeding the Federal Government's ability to enforce immigration law and remove illegal aliens,' the lawsuit alleges. 'These sanctuary policies have 'tied the hands of law enforcement, emboldened dangerous criminals and left [Colorado's] communities vulnerable.''
The lawsuit specifically names Gov. Jared Polis, Attorney General Phil Weiser, Denver Sheriff Elias Diggins and Denver Mayor Mike Johnston. The mayor's office provided FOX31 with a statement, which said:
'Denver will not be bullied or blackmailed, least of all by an administration that has little regard for the law and even less for the truth. We follow all laws local, state, and federal and stand ready to defend our values.'
Denver Mayor's Office
The Colorado Governor's Office also spoke out against the lawsuit.
The statement was released Friday afternoon to FOX31.
'Colorado is not a sanctuary state. The State of Colorado works with local, state and federal law enforcement regularly and we value our partnerships with local, county and federal law enforcement agencies to make Colorado safer. If the courts say that any Colorado law is not valid then we will follow the ruling. We are not going to comment on the merits of the lawsuit.'
Colorado Governor's Office spokesperson
The laws, as previously reported by FOX31, include:
House Bill 19-1124, 'Protect Colorado Residents From Federal Government Overreach,' according to the text, allows law enforcement to cooperate or assist federal immigration authorities in the execution of a federal warrant, but prohibits law enforcement from arresting or detaining individuals based solely on a civil immigration detainer
The measure also stops probation officers from giving someone's personal information to federal immigration authorities
The measure also ensures that individuals who are to be interviewed via telephone or video by a federal immigration authority are informed of their rights
House Bill 23-1100, 'Restrict Government Involvement in Immigration Detention,' prevents state or local government agency employees from entering into intergovernmental agreements allowing for law enforcement to rent bed space to ICE
The measure also terminated two such agreements in the state
The lawsuit alleges that the Denver statutes and Colorado laws are impeding federal immigration operations. Last weekend, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents joined local law enforcement in a raid of a Colorado Springs nightclub. Federal officials said they detained over 100 people and alleged that many were undocumented immigrants.
The lawsuit notes that one of Colorado's laws prohibits state and local governments from being involved in immigration detention. The lawsuit says that currently, the ICE immigration detention center in Aurora is the only location where ICE can detain individuals within Colorado.
'Because ICE's Denver Field Office covers the entire states of Colorado and Wyoming, and the federal government can no longer temporarily house detainees in county detention facilities, immigration officers are forced to travel long distances, even at late hours and in poor weather conditions, to transport people to the Aurora facility,' the lawsuit states. '(F)ederal immigration authorities have to release individuals that it otherwise would detain or alternatively incur significant transport expenses that it would not have incurred prior to CRS 24-76.7-103.'
The complaint also says that Colorado's laws 'impede DHS's ability to readily obtain from local law enforcement the release date' of undocumented immigrants that DHS believes are removable from the U.S.
The lawsuit says that because of this, federal immigration officers are forced to 'engage in difficult and dangerous efforts to re-arrest' or 'determine that it is not appropriate to transfer' an undocumented immigrant to local custody in order to enforce immigration law.
The DOJ is seeking a judgment that says Colorado and Denver's provisions violate the Supremacy Clause, which states 'the activities of the Federal Government are free from regulation by any state.'
This is a developing story and will be updated as new information is obtained.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
4 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Trump charts new territory in bypassing Newsom to deploy National Guard
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Trump invoked a section of the US code that allows the president to bypass a governor's authority over the National Guard and call those troops into federal service when he considers it necessary to repel an invasion or suppress a rebellion, the law states. California's Democratic governor, Gavin Newsom, has sharply criticized the move, saying state and local authorities have the situation under control and accusing Trump of attempting to create a 'spectacle.' Advertisement The directive, announced by the White House late Saturday, came after some protests against immigration raids turned violent, with protesters setting cars aflame and lighting fireworks, and law enforcement in tactical gear using tear gas and stun grenades. Trump claimed in his executive order that the unrest in Southern California was prohibiting the execution of immigration enforcement and therefore met the definition of a rebellion. Advertisement Legal experts said they expect Trump's executive order to draw legal challenges. On Sunday, Newsom asked the Trump administration to rescind his deployment of the National Guard, saying the administration had not followed proper legal procedure in sending them to the state. Trump said the National Guard troops would be used to 'temporarily' protect Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers and 'other United States Government personnel who are performing Federal functions, including the enforcement of Federal law, and to protect Federal property, at locations where protests against these functions are occurring or are likely to occur based on current threat assessments and planned operations.' Goitein called Trump's exercise of the statute an 'untested' departure from its use by previous presidents. She said presidents have in the past invoked this section of federal law in conjunction with the Insurrection Act, which Trump did not. The Insurrection Act authorizes the president to deploy armed forces or the National Guard domestically to suppress armed rebellion, riots or other extreme circumstances. It allows US military personnel to perform law enforcement activities - such as making arrests and performing searches - generally prohibited by another law, the Posse Comitatus Act. The last time a president invoked this section of US code in tandem with the Insurrection Act was in 1992, during the riots that engulfed Los Angeles after the acquittal of police officers in the beating of Rodney King. The Insurrection Act has been invoked throughout US history to deal with riots and labor unrest, and to protect Black Americans from the Ku Klux Klan. Advertisement During his 2024 campaign, Trump and aides discussed invoking the Insurrection Act on his first day in office to quell anticipated protests, and he said at an Iowa rally that he would unilaterally send troops to Democratic-run cities to enforce order. 'You look at any Democrat-run state, and it's just not the same - it doesn't work,' Trump told the crowd, suggesting cities like New York and Los Angeles had severe crime problems. 'We cannot let it happen any longer. And one of the other things I'll do - because you're supposed to not be involved in that, you just have to be asked by the governor or the mayor to come in - the next time, I'm not waiting.' Trump's willingness to use the armed forces to put down protests has drawn fierce blowback from civil liberties groups and Democrats, who have said suppressing dissent with military force is a violation of the country's norms. 'President Trump's deployment of federalized National Guard troops in response to protests is unnecessary, inflammatory, and an abuse of power,' Hina Shamsi, director of the National Security Project at the American Civil Liberties Union, said in a statement. 'By taking this action, the Trump administration is putting Angelenos in danger, creating legal and ethical jeopardy for troops, and recklessly undermining our foundational democratic principle that the military should not police civilians.' Goitein said Trump's move to invoke only the federal service law might be calculated to try to avoid any political fallout from invoking the Insurrection Act, or it's merely a prelude to doing so. 'This is charting new ground here, to have a president try to uncouple these authorities,' Goitein said. 'There's a question here whether he is essentially trying to deploy the powers of the Insurrection Act without invoking it.' Advertisement Trump's move also was unusual in other ways, Goitein said. Domestic military deployments typically come at the request of a governor and in response to the collapse of law enforcement control or other serious threats. Local authorities in Los Angeles have not asked for such help. Goitein said the last time a president ordered the military to a state without a request was in 1965, when President Lyndon B. Johnson sent troops to Alabama to protect civil rights demonstrators. Georgetown law professor Steve Vladeck wrote on his website that invoking the Armed Services Act - and not the Insurrection Act - means the troops will be limited in what role they will be able to perform. 'Nothing that the President did Saturday night would, for instance, authorize these federalized National Guard troops to conduct their own immigration raids; make their own immigration arrests; or otherwise do anything other than, to quote the President's own memorandum, 'those military protective activities that the Secretary of Defense determines are reasonably necessary to ensure the protection and safety of Federal personnel and property,'' Vladeck wrote. Rachel E. VanLandingham, a former Air Force attorney and professor at the Southwestern Law School in Los Angeles, echoed the point. Unless acting under federal orders from the president, National Guard units are state organizations overseen by governors. While under state control, Guard troops have broader law enforcement authorities, VanLandingham said. In this situation, the service members under federal control will have more restraints. 'But it can easily and quickly escalate to mortal and constitutional danger,' she said, if Trump decides to also invoke the Insurrection Act, which would give these Guard members and any active-duty troops who may be summoned to Los Angeles the authority to perform law enforcement duties. Advertisement During his first term as president, Trump suggested invoking the Insurrection Act to deal with protests over the 2020 police killing of George Floyd, but his defense secretary at the time, Mark T. Esper, objected and it never came to fruition. Trump asked the governors of a handful of states to send troops to D.C. in response to the Floyd protests there. Some governors agreed, but others turned aside the request. National Guard members were present outside the White House in June of that year during a violent crackdown on protesters demonstrating against police brutality. That same day, D.C. National Guard helicopters overseen by Trump's Army secretary then, Ryan McCarthy, roared over protesters in downtown Washington, flying as low as 55 feet. An Army review later determined it was a misuse of helicopters specifically designated for medical evacuations. Trump also generated controversy when he sent tactical teams of border officers to Portland, Oregon, and to Seattle to confront protesters there.
Yahoo
7 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Mother details ‘nightmare' after Trump sends son to El Salvador mega-prison where he's being held incommunicado
The last time Ydalis Chirinos Polanco heard from her 25-year-old son was on March 15, when he called her from the El Valle immigration detention center in Texas. He thought he was coming home to Venezuela. Instead, that same day, he was put on a plane to the notorious CECOT prison in El Salvador, a maximum-security facility for terrorists and gang members where he has been held incommunicado ever since. 'He left Venezuela for a better future and it turned into a nightmare,' Chirinos Polanco said through a translator in an interview with The Independent from her home in Valencia, Venezuela. She used to speak daily with her son. She hasn't heard from him in over 85 days. Being sent away so soon wasn't what Ysqueibel Peñaloza had hoped for when he arrived in the U.S. last September, passing legally through California's San Ysidro border crossing, after barely surviving a journey through the Darien Gap in the Panamanian jungle. The plan was to earn money to send back home, and he joined a friend in Raleigh, North Carolina. He found work as a gardener and Uber driver, according to his family and lawyer. (Uber said it did not have a record of Peñaloza working for the company.) Since he was a teenager, Peñaloza, who a past employer from Chile described as 'honorable and hardworking' in a support video, had worked to pay for his younger sister's education. His wages in America allowed him to send enough money back home to fund a semester of her training to be a physical therapist. The 25-year-old's temporary stint in the U.S. was cut short in February, when immigration agents detained him and his friend Arturo Suarez, a Venezuelan singer who uses the stage name Suarez Vzla, as they filmed a music video. Peñaloza had entered the U.S. legally, using the CBP One app, which allowed him to remain in the country temporarily as he awaited an April court date. But he and Suarez were among the more than 100 Venezuelans that the administration eventually accused of being members of the Venezuelan Tren de Aragua gang, using the wartime Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to summarily deport the men from the U.S. without letting them challenge their removals in court. Peñaloza's mother said her son has never had anything to do with a gang, and was too committed to his work to ever get into trouble. The Department of Homeland Security, for its part, told The Independent that Peñaloza was arrested during an operation 'targeting a known Tren de Aragua gang member,' which netted multiple arrests and a firearm. He was then 'confirmed to be' a member of the gang on March 15 — the same day Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act and the removal flights departed to El Salvador. The department declined to share the basis of this conclusion. 'We are confident in our law enforcement's intelligence, and we aren't going to share intelligence reports and undermine national security every time a gang member denies he is one,' Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin wrote in a statement to The Independent. 'That would be insane.' Chirinos Polanco only found out her son had been sent to CECOT when she spotted him in the slickly produced propaganda videos of the men being manhandled and shaved by prison guards at the facility in El Salvador, thanks to an olive branch tattoo on his right knee. He resurfaced again in May, in the background of a visit to the prison by Matt Gaetz, the former Trump administration attorney general nominee, who is now a host at OAN. In the prison, which has a $6 million deal with the U.S., Chirinos Polanco said she saw her son waving to the camera in what she interpreted as a hand signal for help. Around him, inmates jeered at Gaetz and cried 'Freedom!' in Spanish at the passing camera crew. 'He doesn't know that his family is fighting for him to get out,' Peñaloza's mother said, through tears. Chirinos Polanco worries about her son's state of mind inside CECOT, which was designed to house terrorists and is home to scores of admitted gang members that Salvadoran officials openly say will likely never be released. Prior to being sent to CECOT, the quiet 25-year-old told his mother he would sit and cry to himself for hours in immigration detention. She says she can only imagine what it's like now, since 'they have terrorized him in El Salvador.' The circumstances of his arrest — a sudden sweep of an immigrant who entered the U.S. legally, before a court process could play out, with little publicly presented evidence of gang membership, and baffled family members — have been common among the Venezuelans sent to CECOT under the Alien Enemies Act. U.S. immigration officials have insisted they conducted a rigorous vetting process to find the men's gang and other criminal affiliations. Internally, though, the Trump administration knew that just six of the 238 Venezuelans known to have been sent to CECOT had been convicted of violent crimes, while over half had no criminal record or pending charges at all outside of immigration violations, according to government data obtained by a coalition of U.S. and Venezuelan news outlets. (The government insisted, in response to the reporting, that the men in the data are 'actually terrorists, human rights abusers, gang members and more — they just don't have a rap sheet in the U.S.') Further confounding scrutiny, the government has not publicly released a list of those it sent to the prison, and has shared little public evidence of the men's alleged gang ties. As The Independent has reported, the federal government appears to have instead largely based its gang determinations on tattoos many of the men had, even though family members, tattoo artists who made the images, and experts on Venezuelan gangs say the tattoos don't symbolize membership in Tren de Aragua. The Department of Homeland Security told The Independent that 'its intelligence assessments go well beyond just gang affiliate tattoos and social media.' The entire process amounts to an egregious violation of due process, according to Margaret Cargioli, directing attorney for policy and advocacy at the Immigrant Defenders Law Center, an advocacy group representing eight of the men inside CECOT, even though it can't communicate with them. 'What has been one of the most astonishing things is the utter disregard of human beings' due process and their human rights, due to being sent to a place where it was known they would be excommunicated from their families, attorneys, and loved ones, as well as have no access to justice,' Cargioli told The Independent. She said the government did not, and still hasn't, presented 'any evidence' in immigration court that Peñaloza was a gang member before sending him to CECOT. DHS Assistant Secretary McLaughlin added in her statement that the administration has a 'stringent law enforcement assessment in place that abides by due process under the US Constitution.' 'There IS due process for these terrorists who all have final deportation orders,' she wrote. Those challenging the Alien Enemies Act removals argue the men were removed without any meaningful notice, chance to challenge their status, or decision on final removal orders from an immigration judge, the typical deportation process. When asked, the White House did not answer specific questions about the evidence against Peñaloza or criticisms of the removal process to CECOT. 'President Trump is committed to keeping his promises to the American people and removing dangerous criminal and terrorist illegal aliens who pose a threat to the American public,' White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a statement to The Independent. 'CECOT is one of the most secure facilities in the world and there is no better place for the sick criminals we are deporting from the United States.' Faced with this immigration black hole, mothers like Chirinos Polanco have taken on the role of activists. They have staged protests in Caracas, kept in touch with each other during regular meetings and calls, and shared money to support those who depended on their now-detained relatives for remittances. During the interview, Chirinos Polanco, in between sharing family photos, was preparing for a sit-in in front of a United Nations office in Caracas, the kind of demonstration staged by countless women living under repressive regimes in Latin America on behalf of their disappeared loved ones — only this time, the protest is directed at the world's most powerful democracy. Chirinos Polanco said the detentions weigh heavily on the families that they left behind. Her father can't bear to look at pictures of Peñaloza. One of the women she was in touch with, the grandmother of a man in CECOT, recently died of a heart attack in Perú, which her family attributes to the disappearances, Chirinos Polanco said. U.S. courts may offer these families a last chance to connect with their loved ones. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in May that the administration didn't give the alleged Tren de Aragua members the proper chance to contest their removals, and on Wednesday, a federal judge gave the government a week to explain how it would 'facilitate' giving these 137 men a chance at appeal. Such an unlikely reversal has some precedent. After months of public pressure, and a Supreme Court ruling that the U.S. must aid in his return, the U.S. retook custody of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran immigrant it admitted it had mistakenly sent to CECOT despite a court order barring his removal to El Salvador. The U.S. initially claimed it didn't have the power or the need to seek Garcia's return, though the government appears to have changed course, and the man now reportedly faces a federal grand jury indictment in the U.S. for allegedly illegally transporting undocumented immigrants. Chirinos Polanco hopes, with the world watching, the U.S. will finally give a fair hearing to the remaining men inside CECOT. 'We all should have the right to defend ourselves and be heard,' she said. 'Those Venezuelans who were sent to CECOT, they were silenced completely.' Until that silence is broken, Chirinos Polanco barely sleeps and often wakes up early. She's waiting for a phone call from her son that might never come.
Yahoo
8 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US Justice Department reportedly shrinks foreign bribery investigation team
-- The team at the U.S. Justice Department responsible for investigating allegations of foreign bribery has significantly shrunk, according to a Reuters report on Monday. This comes as President Donald Trump's administration reassesses its enforcement of an anti-corruption law that has been in place for decades. The Department of Justice's Fraud Section, which is in charge of enforcing the anti-bribery law, has been reduced to around 15 prosecutors. This is a substantial decrease from the 32 prosecutors reported in January, as stated on the department's website, the report said. This reduction follows an executive order issued by President Trump in February. The order called for a temporary halt in the enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), a law enacted in 1977. The FCPA prohibits companies operating in the U.S. from bribing foreign officials and is considered a fundamental part of federal efforts to fight corruption. Related articles US Justice Department reportedly shrinks foreign bribery investigation team SEC progresses toward DOGE goals, eyes voluntary workforce reductions Trump signs orders to enhance drone defenses, support supersonic travel
