Dark Mode
In a significant legal development, New York Attorney General Letitia James, joined by attorneys general from 19 other Democratic-led states, filed two federal lawsuits on May 13, 2025, against the Trump administration. The legal action contests federal directives that allegedly condition critical federal disaster and transportation funds on state cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.
The lawsuits, filed in the U.S. District Court in Rhode Island, argue that these funding conditions are unconstitutional, placing undue pressure on states to enforce federal immigration laws—an area traditionally managed at the federal level.
Key Points of the Legal Challenge
-
Department of Homeland Security (DHS): One lawsuit challenges DHS’s decision to make disaster preparedness funding contingent upon immigration enforcement cooperation.
-
Department of Transportation (DOT): The second suit targets an April 24 letter from Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, threatening to pull transportation infrastructure funding if states continue using diversity programs viewed as noncompliant with federal immigration policies.
These efforts, according to the lawsuits, are an overreach of executive power and violate the separation of powers as established by the U.S. Constitution. The attorneys general maintain that such federal conditions must be set by Congress—not through unilateral executive actions.
Immigration Law Experts Weigh In
According to Attorney General Letitia James, “The federal government is threatening essential public safety funding to coerce state compliance with immigration enforcement. This not only undermines our state’s authority but also endangers the well-being of our communities.”
These lawsuits align with prior legal victories where courts rejected similar federal attempts to tie immigration compliance to unrelated funding streams, such as education or housing grants.
Impact on Immigrant Communities and States’ Rights
For immigrant families, undocumented individuals, and mixed-status households, the implications of these funding threats are far-reaching. Reduced funding for disaster preparedness or transportation could disproportionately affect marginalized communities, especially in sanctuary cities and states that prioritize immigrant protections.
This legal challenge also underscores a broader national debate: Can federal funding be leveraged to enforce immigration policy at the state level? The answer, according to the lawsuits, should be a firm no.
How Spar & Bernstein Can Help You Navigate These Changes
At Spar & Bernstein, our experienced immigration attorneys are closely monitoring this case and its potential ripple effects on immigration enforcement policies, public benefits, and civil liberties. We are here to help:
-
Understand your rights under changing federal immigration laws
-
Assist with deportation defense and ICE-related legal actions
-
Help local governments and nonprofits advocate for immigrants’ rights
Whether you are a concerned individual, a family seeking permanent residency, or a community leader navigating federal compliance, Spar & Bernstein’s immigration legal team provides the support and clarity you need.