Trump sues NYC, Mayor Adams to end sanctuary city protections for immigrants
The lawsuit, filed Thursday in Brooklyn Federal Court, cites Sunday's shooting of an off-duty Customs and Border Patrol officer in Fort Washington Park and the arrest of two migrants who were in the country illegally. It contends that the city has 'long been at the vanguard of interfering with enforcing this country's immigration laws.'
The lawsuit is seeking an injunction to put a stop to city laws barring the use of city resources from being used in immigration enforcement, and blocking city agencies like the Department of Correction and the police from honoring civil immigration detainers placed by federal authorities.
The city's sanctuary laws were passed under Mayor de Blasio in 2014. They limit communications and cooperation between federal immigration enforcement agencies and local agencies, including law enforcement.
The lawsuit was filed against the city, Mayor Eric Adams and Council Speaker Adrienne Adams, as well as the NYPD and the Department of Correction. It claims local protections are designed to obstruct the lawful enforcement of federal immigration law, and that the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution means that federal law pre-empts any laws passed by New York City.
'We will review the lawsuit,' Adams spokeswoman Kayla Mamelak said. The council did not immediately comment.
'The challenged provisions of New York City law reflect the City's intentional effort to obstruct the United States' enforcement of federal immigration law, by (among much else) impeding the consultation and communication between federal and local law enforcement officials that is necessary for the United States to enforce the law and keep Americans safe,' the lawsuit contends.
'New York City's Sanctuary Provisions have the purpose and effect of making it more difficult for federal immigration officers to carry out their responsibilities in that jurisdiction.'
DHS Secretary Kristi Noem on Monday blamed the mayor and New York's sanctuary city policies for the shooting of the off-duty Customs and Border Patrol agent.
'This officer is in the hospital today, fighting for his life, because of the policies of the mayor of the city and the City Council and the people that were in charge of keeping the public safe refused to do so,' Noem said. 'When I look at what Mayor Adams has done to New York City, it breaks my heart to see the families that have suffered because of his policies.'
Noem's comments marked an unusual Trump administration rebuke of Adams, whose criminal indictment was dismissed by Trump's DOJ in what has been criticized as a corrupt deal to aid in the administration's deportation efforts.
Though named as the defendant in Trump's lawsuit, Adams himself has been critical of the sweep of the city's sanctuary city protections and has talked about the possibility of using executive orders to dial them back.
Mamelak said the lawsuit does not point to any change in the relationship between Adams and the Trump administration.
'Mayor Adams has been clear: no one should be afraid to dial 911, send their kids to school, or go to the hospital, and no New Yorker should feel forced to hide in the shadows,' Mamelak said. 'That's why the mayor supports the essence of the local laws put in place by the City Council — but he has also been clear they go too far when it comes to dealing with those violent criminals on our streets and has urged the Council to reexamine them to ensure we can effectively work with the federal government to make our city safer. So far, the Council has refused.'
At a press conference Wednesday, the mayor, asked about sanctuary policies, said he wished he could use his executive authority to override laws he didn't like.
'I wish my EOs can override laws. I'd override a whole lot of laws,' Adams said. 'But executive orders can't override laws. And that's one of the misnomers that's out there, that mayors have the ability to override existing laws. No, the City Council, they pass laws and we sign it into law. But we can't use the power of our pen with executive orders to override the laws.'
Adams, through his Deputy Randy Mastro, did issue an executive order earlier this year allowing ICE to operate an office on Rikers Island, but those plans are at a standstill after the Council challenged the move in court.
The City Council has pushed back strongly against any changes to the sanctuary laws, which are intended to allow immigrants to make use of the city's resources, send children to school and seek help from law enforcement.
_____
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
8 minutes ago
- Axios
Trump doesn't oppose Netanyahu plan for full Gaza occupation: U.S. officials
President Trump does not oppose Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's plan to launch a new military operation to occupy the entire Gaza Strip, U.S. and Israeli officials say. Why it matters: The Israeli Security Cabinet is expected to approve on Thursday a highly controversial plan to expand the war. According to the sources, Trump has decided not to intervene and to let the Israeli government make its own decisions. The big picture: The new operation to occupy additional areas of central Gaza, including Gaza City, is expected to take at least several months and involve displacing around 1 million Palestinian civilians. The Israel Defense Forces would also be moving into areas where Israel believes hostages are being held, possibly risking their lives. Netanyahu is poised to escalate the war despite massive international pressure to stop the fighting and prioritize the humanitarian crisis in the enclave — and over the objections of his own top generals. What they're saying: Two U.S. officials tell Axios Trump won't intervene in the Israeli decision-making around the new operation. When asked on Tuesday about a possible Israeli full occupation of Gaza, Trump said: "I really can't say. It is going to be pretty much up to Israel." Netanyahu and his aides claim Hamas isn't interested in signing a comprehensive ceasefire and hostage deal on terms Israel can accept, and that only military pressure can change that. "We are not willing to remain in the current limbo and we are not willing to surrender to Hamas' demands — so essentially only one option is left, to take a drastic step. This is the last card we have left," a Netanyahu aide told Axios. Behind the scenes: One U.S. official said Trump was moved by the video released by Hamas of an Israeli hostage digging his own grave. "It influenced the president, and he is going to let the Israelis do what they need to do," the official said. At the same time, the U.S. official said the Trump administration doesn't support Israeli annexation of parts of Gaza — another possibility discussed by Israeli officials. Between the lines: The IDF has been reluctant to attack the areas in Gaza that the new plan focuses on for fear of accidentally killing hostages. According to Israeli officials, IDF Chief of Staff Gen. Eyal Zamir told Netanyahu such a move would endanger the hostages and could lead to Israeli military rule in Gaza with full responsibility over 2 million Palestinians. "You are walking into a trap," Zamir told Netanyahu in a meeting on Tuesday, according to multiple reports in the Israeli press. It appears that Netanyahu was unmoved. Split screen: The White House plans to focus in the coming weeks on addressing the starvation crisis in Gaza, though the expansion of the war would make that more difficult. In a meeting Monday evening at the White House, Trump and special envoy Steve Witkoff discussed plans for the U.S. to significantly increase its role in providing humanitarian aid to Gaza. "The United States remains committed to helping alleviate the situation in Gaza and is supportive of efforts to increase humanitarian aid. However, the United States is not 'taking over' the aid effort," a U.S. official told Axios. What to watch: The Trump administration plans to increase its funding to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) in order to open new aid centers in parts of Gaza to which displaced Palestinians will be relocated, both in north and central Gaza, sources say.
The Hill
8 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump officials eye Indiana as redistricting war intensifies
The Trump administration is turning its attention to Indiana as Republicans look for other red states to follow Texas's lead in the building redistricting battle. Vice President Vance is visiting Indianapolis on Thursday to meet with Gov. Mike Braun (R) amid chatter about potential mid-cycle redistricting in the Hoosier State. Braun has said there are no commitments at the moment, but left the door open for the matter to come up at the meeting. The visit suggests Indiana could be one of the next states on the GOP's list to move forward with redrawing congressional maps, though it's unclear whether Indiana Republicans have the appetite for it. 'They are completely rewriting the implied rule book,' Pete Seat, a GOP strategist and former communications director for the Indiana Republican Party, said of the redistricting push. 'It's a Pandora's box, because if you do it in Texas, you do it here, you do it in some other red states. What's going to happen in the blue states? They're going to respond in kind. And then you have a redistricting arms race, and I don't know where that ends,' Seat said. Vance's visit to Indianapolis comes amid escalating drama over a proposed redraw in Texas, where a plan backed by President Trump could net Republicans five House seats ahead of next year's high-stakes midterms. Texas Democrats fled the state over the weekend, breaking quorum in a last-ditch bid to stall the state legislature from moving forward. Meanwhile, the developments in the Lone Star State have had a domino effect across the country. In calling for the Texas changes last month, Trump floated that 'there could be some other states' on the table. The Trump administration's political allies were quietly exploring options in Indiana late last month, Punchbowl News reported. And the Indy Star reported on Wednesday that Vance was expected to talk to state leaders about a potential redraw. Braun's office confirmed to The Hill that the governor is set for a private meeting with Vance on Thursday to discuss a number of topics, without specifying whether redistricting is on that agenda. Vance's team also said that the vice president will 'discuss a variety of issues' with Braun and state officials while in town to headline a Republican National Committee fundraiser, according to a statement obtained by NewsNation, The Hill's sister station. 'At the end of the day, it's up to Braun and the state legislature. But … I'm sure [redistricting] is going to be touched upon, because it's a situation where you would be, if the opportunity presents itself based on the law, on the data, etc, then you'd be foolish not to try to take advantage of it,' said GOP strategist Ford O'Connell, a former Trump White House and campaign surrogate. Asked on Tuesday whether he'd call for a special session if the vice president asked him to do so for redistricting, the Indiana governor told reporters that 'whatever we discuss there, and if that topic comes up, it's exploratory.' 'So there's been no commitments made other than, I think they're going to come into every state that's got the possibility of that happening, and obviously you can see in Texas how that's eventuated,' Braun said, according to WXIN, a NewsNation affiliate. To change the maps, Braun would need to call a special session of the state General Assembly, where Republicans boast a supermajority — and they'd have to act quickly to make it happen before the midterms. 'My guess, if I had to guess, would be that JD Vance would try to sort of take the governor's temperature on the likelihood of a special session being called,' said Steven Webster, a political science professor at the University of Indiana in Bloomington. O'Connell argued that it would be wise for Vance and Braun to have a conversation about the options, 'because if the shoe was on the other foot, the Democrats would be having that conversation if they hadn't already eaten up all the Republican seats.' Republicans hold seven of the state's nine congressional seats, but some think the GOP could get at least one more. 'That seems kind of like a small thing. But on the other hand, when the balance of power is often so tight in Washington, I think there's probably value in getting any seats that you possibly could if you're a political party,' Webster said. Redrawn Indiana lines would likely squeeze Rep. Frank Mrvan (D-Ind.) in the northwest, while Rep. Andre Carson (D-Ind.) may be somewhat safer in his district around Indianapolis. 'It is no surprise that some believe redistricting is the only option to cling to power when they know the American people are rejecting the damage done by the House Republican Majority,' Mrvan said in a statement on potential Indiana redistricting, arguing it would be 'reprehensible' to call the state Assembly in for a special session on the matter. Other Indiana Democrats have pushed back strongly against the possibility. 'Sending the Vice President here to beg for another Congressional seat is beyond absurd,' Indiana Democratic Party Chair Karen Tallian said in a statement. State Rep. Matt Pierce said in a statement from the state House Democratic caucus that Trump and Vance are 'desperate' if they think that 'having seven of the nine seats in Indiana held by Republicans is not enough.' Whether Vance ultimately raises the matter during his visit or not, it remains unclear whether Indiana Republicans would want to pursue it. 'We know that redistricting is expensive. And we had just done this back in 2021,' said Carly Schmitt, a political science professor at Indiana State University, pointing to redistricting efforts after the 2020 census. 'If we're thinking about the need to shore up more Republican [power] either at the state level or the congressional level, it's already happened.' Indiana has an 'A' grade in the Gerrymandering Project's report card for its latest round of congressional redistricting, while Texas has an 'F' grade. 'My sense is there will be – and is – hesitation regarding this idea. Because Republicans in this state take great pride in how we redistrict,' Seat said. 'You're not hearing a lot of excitement for this idea that the way you have seen and heard it in Texas.' But Indiana isn't the only sign that the Trump administration is looking for redistricting opportunities beyond the Lone Star State. Missouri Republicans have signaled openness to redistricting after the state House Speaker pro tem reportedly got a call from the White House last month, according to the Missouri Independent. Ohio is set to redistrict due to state requirements, and Florida Republicans have also floated a redraw in Texas's stead. Meanwhile, Democrats are looking to counter would-be GOP gains by weighing redistricting in blue strongholds, including New York and California. The Golden State's Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) has said he's moving forward with a plan to put redistricting before voters this fall, contingent on what happens in Texas. 2024 Election Coverage The talk of tit-for-tat redistricting and the potential for other states to get involved threatens to roil next year's midterms, as Republicans defend their slim 219-212 majority in the House. 'I mean, it could very well end with the exact same margin that we have now,' Seat said. If Texas moves forward, prompting California and other states, he added, 'I think it's just going to be a tit-for-tat until every single deadline hits.'
Axios
8 minutes ago
- Axios
Americans now support corporate activism again: Survey
U.S. adults' stance on corporate activism has flip-flopped, according to a Wednesday Bentley University-Gallup report. Why it matters: After years of decline in support, more Americans across demographics and political affiliations want businesses to take a public stance on hot-button topics including free speech, immigration policy, diversity, climate change and health care issues. "The data underscore an important insight for businesses," the report said. "What they say, and who they say it to, matters." By the numbers: 51% of U.S. adults in the May survey said they believe companies should take public stances on current issues, per the poll. That's a 13 percentage point increase from last year and a reversal of a downward trend that began after 2022. Flashback: Last year, 38% of respondents said they thought business should take a public stance on current events. At that point, the biggest drops in sentiment were within groups of people who were previously the most receptive — Democrats, Americans under 45, Black Americans and Asian Americans. State of play: Now, 71% of Democrats and 33% of Republicans support businesses taking public stances. Support for business has risen for them to take a public stance on free speech, immigration policy and international conflicts. The intrigue: While Americans support businesses speaking out publicly, they're more apprehensive about their own employers communicating on most topics.
