On Wednesday, January 22, 2025, the Justice Department issued a directive that has unsettled legal experts. The directive empowers federal prosecutors to aim at state and local officials who defy immigration enforcement by the Trump administration, a step critics deem as an extraordinary extension of federal authority.
The directive, a three-page memo by Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove, is seen as an “extraordinary” and “very heavy-handed” method of compelling local compliance with federal immigration goals according to CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig. Speaking on CNN’s “NewsNight,” Honig highlighted the substantial opposition, citing concerns of federal overreach.
The directive outlines the formation of a “Sanctuary Cities Enforcement Working Group” tasked with identifying and countering local policies that hinder federal immigration enforcement. The group will work in conjunction with U.S. Attorney’s offices across the country to instigate criminal prosecution and civil litigation against jurisdictions that limit their cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Legal experts warn that this approach parallels the unsuccessful attempts during Trump’s first term to penalize sanctuary jurisdictions. Federal courts, during that time, rejected multiple attempts to withhold federal funding from cities and states that limited cooperation with ICE, citing constitutional issues.
As Honig elaborated, “What is being threatened is if you commit a crime, if you harbor an illegal alien, which is a federal crime… Now, typically, DOJ has overlooked that. That’s within prosecutorial discretion. But what the feds are saying is, ‘If you, locals, if you harbor an illegal alien, if you obstruct our efforts to enforce this law, then we might prosecute you.’”
The directive unequivocally reverses policies from the Biden administration. It instructs prosecutors to pursue “the most serious, readily provable offense” in immigration cases. It also calls on FBI Joint Terrorism Task Forces to aid immigration operations and necessitates the Justice Department components to share immigration status data with Homeland Security.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta dubbed the memo as “legally suspect” and pledged to uphold state sovereignty. His state had earlier won challenges from the Trump administration to its sanctuary laws during Trump’s first term, successfully asserting that the forced compliance of state law enforcement with federal immigration agents violated the Tenth Amendment.
Constitutional law experts point out the anti-commandeering doctrine as a significant hurdle for the directive’s execution. The doctrine, upheld by numerous Supreme Court decisions, prevents the federal government from forcing states to enforce federal laws or policies.
Despite justifying its aggressive stance by mentioning worries about fentanyl trafficking, international gang activity, and crimes by undocumented immigrants, critics point out that these arguments failed to convince courts in past legal battles against Trump’s immigration policies.
The release of the directive has prompted several states to prepare for legal challenges. Attorneys General from New York and Illinois have already announced their plans to oppose any effort to compel compliance with federal immigration enforcement, citing successful legal precedents from Trump’s first term.
On CNN, California Attorney General Bonta said, “We are not required to take part in immigration enforcement efforts.” However, not every Democrat is united against this issue. On Wednesday, January 22, 46 House Democrats—approximately one-fifth of the caucus—joined 217 Republicans to pass a bill that demands the detention and deportation of undocumented immigrants accused of theft.
The Senate has already approved the bill with support from Democrats, and it now awaits President Trump’s signature to become law.
