The U.S. Department of Justice has initiated a lawsuit against the city of Los Angeles, its Mayor Karen Bass, and City Council members, asserting that L.A.’s sanctuary city law is “illegal.”
The lawsuit, brought forth by the Trump administration in California’s Central District federal court, states that the country is currently “facing a crisis of illegal immigration” and argues that its efforts to address this issue are being obstructed by sanctuary cities like Los Angeles, which allegedly refuse to cooperate with federal immigration authorities.
According to the lawsuit, President Donald Trump campaigned on a platform focused on deporting “millions of illegal immigrants” and asserts that the City Council’s sanctuary city ordinance aims to “thwart the will of the American people regarding deportations.”
In recent weeks, federal immigration agents have conducted extensive operations in Southern California, resulting in the arrest of more than 1,600 immigrants and triggering significant protests in downtown Los Angeles, as well as in Paramount and other communities.
The lawsuit claims that L.A.’s non-cooperation with federal immigration authorities has led to “lawlessness, rioting, looting, and vandalism.”
Federal prosecutors argue that the situation has become so severe that the federal government deployed the California National Guard and United States Marines to restore order.
“A direct confrontation with federal immigration authorities was the inevitable outcome of the Sanctuary City law,” the lawsuit states.
Attorney General Pam Bondi has labeled the city’s sanctuary policies as a significant factor contributing to recent violence and chaos in Los Angeles, stating, “Jurisdictions like Los Angeles that flout federal law by prioritizing illegal aliens over American citizens are undermining law enforcement at every level — it ends under President Trump.”
Mayor Karen Bass has not responded immediately to the legal challenge but has previously rebuffed the Trump administration’s claims depicting Los Angeles as a city rife with violence.
She stresses that it is the actions of immigration agents that are causing turmoil, creating fear and disrupting the local economy.
To frame the situation accurately, Bass remarked, “To characterize what is going on in our city as a city of mayhem is just an outright lie.”
Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez, who represents parts of Hollywood, expressed strong opposition to the lawsuit, asserting that the president is “tearing families apart” while attempting to force compliance with what he terms a “white nationalist agenda.”
“We refuse to stand by and let Donald Trump deport innocent families. We’re going to do everything within our power to keep families together,” he stated.
The city’s sanctuary city law, proposed in early 2023, was largely driven by local policy initiatives before being finalized after Trump’s election victory in November.
The ordinance prevents city employees and city property from being utilized for immigration enforcement purposes, with an exception for serious crimes.
Under the law, city officials are prohibited from inquiring about individuals’ citizenship or immigration status unless necessary for city services, and all information that could help identify someone’s citizenship is treated as confidential.
Federal prosecutors argue that the ordinance violates the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution by obstructing the federal government’s ability to enforce laws passed by Congress.
They claim that the city is treating federal immigration authorities differently than other law enforcement agencies, including restricting their access to city property and individual detainees, creating a discriminatory environment against federal officials.
The federal lawsuit highlights that Los Angeles’ sanctuary city ordinance extends beyond measures in other jurisdictions, seeking to actively undermine the federal government’s efforts in immigration enforcement.
The complaint references a June 10 meeting where council members questioned Police Chief Jim McDonnell about how the LAPD was handling immigration enforcement.
When Councilmember Imelda Padilla requested advance notice for impending raids, Chief McDonnell characterized the request as “obstruction of justice.”
This legal action comes as Los Angeles city officials contemplate filing their own lawsuit against the Trump administration.
Their proposed legal measures aim to prevent federal immigration agents from infringing on the constitutional rights of local residents.
The City Council is scheduled to convene on Tuesday to instruct City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto to prioritize legal actions that protect local constituents from issues like racial profiling and unlawful searches or detentions.
Mayor Bass has expressed her deep concern over the impacts of immigration raids on her community.
She argues that these actions have resulted in family separations and cultivated an atmosphere of fear across various public spaces.
Previously, Bass stated, “I want to tell him to stop the raids. I want to tell him that this is a city of immigrants.
If you want to devastate the economy of the city of Los Angeles, then attack the immigrant population.”
Chris Newman, legal director for the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, views the federal lawsuit as largely symbolic and believes that its true intent is to pressure Los Angeles into conforming to the Trump administration’s immigration policies.
Newman stated, “On the law, it’s clearly wrong. The complaint seems to be unaware of the existence of the 10th Amendment to the United States Constitution.”
He highlighted that while the federal government has authority over immigration laws, it does not permit actions that would unconstitutionally undermine local governance.
Newman suggested that it is hypocritical for the federal government to claim discrimination against immigration officials, given the evident racism and discrimination that has characterized the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement actions.
Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law, echoed similar concerns, stating that the lawsuit appears to contradict the 10th Amendment and asserting that the federal government cannot compel a city to deploy its resources for immigration enforcement.
Although local cities must not hinder federal immigration officials, they are not obligated to assist them.
For instance, Chemerinsky elaborated, some cities might opt not to transfer individuals to ICE for fear of deterring victims of crime from coming forward.
Public hospitals may also choose not to report individuals to avoid discouraging those in need of medical care from seeking help.
An aide to City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto has defended the sanctuary law, asserting that it fully aligns with federal law and constitutional principles.
“Our City remains committed to standing up for our constitutional rights and the rights of our residents,” stated spokesperson Karen Richardson.
“We will defend our ordinance and continue to uphold policies that reflect our longstanding values as a welcoming community for all residents.”
image source from：latimes
