A federal judge has dismissed the Trump administration’s case that targeted Boston’s sanctuary city policy. Since 2014, under the Boston Trust Act, the city has limited civil cooperation with federal immigration agents.
The Department of Justice sued last September, arguing the city’s policy was delaying immigration enforcement causing “sovereign harm” to the federal government. Attorneys with the Justice Department asked a federal judge to bar enforcement.
In his ruling Thursday, Judge Leo T. Sorokin wrote that neither he — nor any federal judge — could provide the kind of relief that the federal government is seeking, and therefore had to dismiss the case.
According to Sorokin, under a 2017 decision from the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, civil immigration detainers do not permit local law enforcement to keep a person in custody beyond what state law allows, and that challenging the legality of Boston’s Trust Act would not change that fact.
“With or without the Boston Trust Act, then, Boston police officers cannot detain a person pursuant solely to a federal civil immigration detainer or administrative warrant,” he wrote.
“An order enjoining the Boston Trust Act would not liberate the City to empower its officers to take actions state law does not authorize, nor give Boston police officers the individual choice to honor ICE detainers,” Sorokin wrote.
In a statement in response to the ruling, Mayor Michelle Wu said Boston will continue to protect its residents from what it described as “reckless” federal policies.
“We reaffirm our commitment to the local public safety laws and community policing that have made Boston the safest major city in America,” the statement read. “We urge the Administration to abandon these lawless attacks on cities, our police departments, and the residents we serve. Good riddance.”
Boston City Councilor Ruthzee Louijuene says the lawsuit was merely an intimidation tactic, one that took up resources and sparked fear in vulnerable immigrant communities.
“We are using our time fighting battles that we should not have to fight. That is exhausting, and that is debilitating, and that is the point,” she told GBH News. “So this isn’t really a victory, because our government should be helping people solve real problems.”
The Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement did not respond to requests for comment. The Trump administration has not indicated if it plans to appeal.
Then-Attorney General Pam Bondi criticized Wu for the policy when filing suit last fall.
“The City of Boston and its Mayor have been among the worst sanctuary offenders in America — they explicitly enforce policies designed to undermine law enforcement and protect illegal aliens from justice,” Bondi said in a statement. “If Boston won’t protect its citizens from illegal alien crime, this Department of Justice will.”
“This unconstitutional attack on our city is not a surprise,” Wu said in response to the original filing. “Boston is a thriving community, the economic and cultural hub of New England, and the safest major city in the country — but this administration is intent on attacking our community to advance their own authoritarian agenda.”
There is no strict definition for sanctuary cities, but the term generally describes places that limit cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. ICE enforces immigration laws nationwide but seeks help from state and local authorities to identify immigrants wanted for deportation and hold them for federal officers.
“Boston’s neighborhoods are safer because of the Trust Act, and today’s ruling is not only right on the law but right for our neighborhoods and the people who make them strong,” said Elizabeth Sweet, Executive Director of the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition, in reaction to the ruling.
“It’s sort of trying to use the courts as political theater,” said local immigration attorney Todd Pomerleau. “On the merits of the case — tossing out the lawsuit — is just another example of the Trump administration trying to blow smoke up everyone’s rear ... It’s a scare tactic. It’s like, 'Do as I say and don’t challenge us. We are the big, bad federal government here to impose our racism and xenophobic viewpoints on immigration on your city, you know?’”
The Trump administration has sued various cities around the country over their immigration enforcement policies, including Los Angeles, New York and Denver.
The cities of Chelsea and Somerville have a related, ongoing case in Boston federal court. In that suit, the cities, represented by Lawyers for Civil Rights, are suing the Trump administration over its threats to strip cities with sanctuary policies of federal funds and prosecute them if they don’t assist federal immigration enforcement. They argue that the administration is violating their constitutional rights. Chelsea and Somerville adopted sanctuary policies in 2007 and 1987, respectively.
A judge denied their effort for a preliminary injunction against the Trump administration last fall, and the case is ongoing.
“This decision affirms what we have argued on behalf of our clients, Chelsea and Somerville, in our case against the federal government — that cities are well within their constitutionally delegated authority to set lawful local priorities,” said Jillian Lenson, senior attorney at Lawyers for Civil Rights.
“That’s including policies governing public safety practices, like making sure victims of crimes can safely report to and interact with police.”
Lenson said it looked like Sorokin interpreted the government’s suit against Boston as “illegal overreach.”
“The court’s dismissal of the Trump administration’s case against Boston bolsters this well-established precedent,” she said.
Fidel Maltez, Chelsea’s city manager, said that he was “ecstatic” about the court ruling and that it affirms what Chelsea is arguing in its case.
“Our sanctuary city policies are an entirely lawful exercise of authority,” he said. “Chelsea has the constitutional right to set lawful local priorities, including public safety practices, and making sure victims of crimes can safely report to and interact with our local Chelsea police, and any attempt to interfere with these lawful policies violates our constitutionally-delegated powers.”
This story uses material from the Associated Press.
