Trump-allied group’s warnings may signal legal blueprint to attack ‘sanctuary’ jurisdictions
The ominous letters went to hundreds of state and local officials across the US two days before Christmas. It was a potential blueprint for how the Trump administration could target “sanctuary” jurisdictions that resist mass deportations.
They threatened criminal charges and lawsuits against officials’ personal finances. They invoked RICO, the federal statute often used to combat organized crime.
“You and your subordinates could face up to 20 years in prison,” America First Legal, a group led by current and former advisers to President-elect Donald Trump, said in the letter. Its chairman, Stephan Molenaarwill be deputy head of policy in the new administration and has been the architect of Trump’s immigration policy for years.
The targets of the letters are city, county and state officials in U.S. sanctuary jurisdictions, a term rooted in medieval law that today includes a range of protections for immigrants, especially those living in the U.S. illegally. Sanctuary jurisdictions limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities.
Some targets were chosen based on statements they made after Trump’s election. Maura Healey, the Democratic governor of Massachusetts, is being called to task for vowing to use “every tool in the toolbox” to resist mass deportations in her state. But most were listed because they refused to assist U.S. Immigration, Customs and Enforcement by detaining people wanted for being in the country illegally.
The warnings could point to part of a legal roadmap for Trump crackdown on immigration And promise of mass deportations. It accuses officials of violating several federal statutes, including one against immigrant smuggling and another against interfering with the work of federal officials.
On Saturday, an official said a federal immigration operation, centered in Chicago, will begin after Trump takes office on Monday and target more than 300 people with a history of violent crime. Chicago has been a sanctuary city for decades, and officials there have said they are backing away from those commitments.
Courts have repeatedly upheld the legality of most sanctuary laws.
“Sacred laws do not protect, harbor or hide ‘illegal aliens,’” said Mark Fleming, an attorney with the Chicago-based National Immigration Justice Center, a pro-immigration group. “What the laws do is they say, ‘Your role (as federal officials) is to do immigration enforcement. Our role is not that, and we are not going to participate in it.’”
Immigration lawyers scoff at the letters’ legal arguments. Police and officials in sanctuary jurisdictions are, they note, enforcing statutory laws.
But officials, attorneys and immigration attorneys are taking the letters seriously. The involvement of Miller, a senior adviser during Trump’s first term and a key figure in many policy decisions, especially on immigration, means they have no choice.
Moreover, many say the legal arguments may not even be relevant.
“These types of letters are really more about spreading fear than articulating anything that will hold up legally,” said Sirine Shebaya, an attorney and executive director of the National Immigration Project.
It is a fear that can be used against officials and against the immigrants themselves.
“We hear a lot of concerns from our immigrant community about whether the city will continue to exist (as a sanctuary) or whether they will put an end to it,” said Peter Pedemonti, co-director of the New Sanctuary Movement of Philadelphia.
During the first Trump administration, the White House tried to use financial cudgels against sanctuary jurisdictions by denying them public safety grants that can be critical to law enforcement budgets. Courts have largely rejected these efforts, although some Trump loyalists say this could happen again in the new administration.
The letters could be a signal that the bats will be legal. They went to more than 200 civil servants, including: Los Angeles Mayor Karen BassNew York Governor Kathy Hochul and county officials from Maine, Nebraska and California.
They are largely identical, although occasionally personalized with details of crimes allegedly committed by immigrants in a particular official’s jurisdiction.
They are all full of dire warnings.
“Each of you could face criminal charges and civil liability for your illegal actions,” wrote James Rogers, senior counsel for the America First Legal Foundation.
“Employees in your jurisdiction involved in implementing sanctuary policies that prevent federal immigration officials from carrying out their duties may face up to six years in prison,” he wrote.
Most lawyers roll their eyes at such threats, but they also know that weak legal arguments don’t necessarily stop prosecutions.
“I think these threats are actually a critical part of the strategy,” Fleming said. “Because the reality is that even if they lose, they can win by putting someone through this.”
Fears of brutal lawsuits, especially in smaller jurisdictions without teams of lawyers, could prompt officials to relax sanctuary laws, or even allow local law enforcement to cooperate with federal immigration officials.
ICEwhich has just 21,000 employees, many of them administrators or support staff, would need enormous help from local law enforcement to fulfill Trump’s promises of mass deportations
The sanctuary designation has already caused deep divisions in some jurisdictions, with sheriffs in California, Washington and elsewhere vowing to ignore sanctuary policies. In Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis has said he is willing to suspend elected officials if they “neglect their duties” under Trump’s promised immigration mandates.
But Democratic leaders including Illinois Governor JB Pritzker and New York’s Hochul vowed after Trump’s election that they would remain steadfast in their sanctuary policies.
A few days after the election, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson emphasized that the city’s police department would not assist ICE agents with deportations.
“We will not bend or break,” Johnson told reporters.
The question is whether sanctuary officials will remain steadfast in the face of personal legal threats and a new White House that has made clear immigration is a top priority.
“Stephen Miller will be the president’s deputy chief counsel,” said R. Linus Chan, an attorney who works with immigrants detained by ICE and a professor at the University of Minnesota law school. “So you can’t really just ignore him.”