A federal judge has thrown a wrench into the Trump administration’s plan to strong-arm sanctuary states into compliance with immigration enforcement.
The Daily Caller reported that U.S. District Judge John McConnell, an Obama appointee, issued a preliminary injunction Thursday, halting the Department of Transportation’s (DOT) attempt to withhold federal funds from states that refuse to cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
California, New York, Illinois, and 17 other states argued that the Trump administration lacks the authority to tie road and infrastructure funds to federal immigration policies. Their case landed in McConnell’s courtroom, where he sided with the plaintiffs, at least for now.
Back in April, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy laid down the gauntlet, warning that states and cities defying federal immigration laws would lose DOT funding. “Federal grants come with a clear obligation to adhere to federal laws,” Duffy declared in a prepared statement.
His tough talk aimed to pressure sanctuary jurisdictions into aligning with the administration’s deportation goals, but it’s now stalled by McConnell’s injunction.
McConnell’s ruling didn’t mince words, calling the DOT’s policy “arbitrary and capricious” in court documents. He argued that the directive lacks clarity on how states must cooperate with ICE to secure funds meant for roads, rails, and airports. This judicial slap-down suggests the administration’s approach may be more bluster than legally sound policy.
The 20 plaintiffs states, all but one led by Democratic governors, cheered the injunction as a defense of state sovereignty. They contend that transportation funds, critical for public safety and infrastructure, shouldn’t be pawns in federal immigration battles. It’s a classic states’ rights argument, repackaged with progressive flair.
Duffy, however, sees it differently, framing compliance as a matter of national integrity. “It shouldn’t be controversial – enforce our immigration rules,” he said in April, tying the issue to broader conservative priorities like ending “anti-American DEI policies.” His rhetoric resonates with the MAGA base but risks alienating states reliant on federal dollars.
The DOT’s policy traces back to an April executive order from President Trump, directing federal agencies to identify sanctuary jurisdictions nationwide.
The order aimed to root out localities shielding unauthorized migrants from ICE, a cornerstone of Trump’s immigration agenda. It’s part of a broader push that’s seen the Department of Justice sue cities and states for non-cooperation.
By Monday, Duffy doubled down, vowing that the DOT “will NOT fund rogue state actors” who defy federal immigration enforcement. His public statement left no room for compromise, signaling a hardline stance. Yet, McConnell’s injunction has, for now, clipped the wings of this aggressive approach.
The lawsuit’s roots lie in Duffy’s April announcement that all transportation funding recipients must comply with federal laws or face consequences.
States like California and New York, long at odds with Trump’s immigration policies, saw this as an overreach. They argue that local law enforcement shouldn’t be forced into the role of federal immigration agents.
The plaintiff states case hinges on the idea that Congress, not the executive branch, controls the purse strings for transportation funds. McConnell’s injunction buys them time to argue this point in court, keeping the cash flowing for now. It’s a calculated move to frustrate the administration’s deportation ambitions while the legal battle unfolds.
Duffy’s Monday remarks also aimed at cities failing to curb rioters damaging transportation infrastructure, saying they shouldn’t “expect a red cent” from the DOT. This jab at urban governance, often Democratic strongholds, ties into the administration’s narrative of law and order. But it’s a distraction from the core issue: federal overreach versus state autonomy.
The Justice Department has a history of tangling with sanctuary jurisdictions, previously attempting to withhold funds with mixed success. These efforts have often been rebuffed by courts, and McConnell’s ruling fits that pattern. It’s a reminder that the administration’s immigration crackdowns face steep legal hurdles.
McConnell’s injunction doesn’t end the fight; it just pauses the DOT’s policy while the lawsuit plays out. The Trump administration, undeterred, is likely to appeal, keeping the issue in the courts for months. This legal ping-pong is par for the course in the contentious sanctuary state debate.
