The Department of Justice has filed a lawsuit against four New Jersey cities over their sanctuary policies, setting up a major showdown between federal immigration enforcement and local governance.
At a Glance
- The DOJ is suing Newark, Jersey City, Hoboken, and Paterson for policies that allegedly obstruct federal immigration enforcement
- All four Mayors named in the lawsuit are Democrats, with two currently running for governor
- The lawsuit claims these cities violate federal law by refusing to share information with Immigration and Customs Enforcement
- City leaders defend their policies, arguing they’re not legally obligated to enforce federal immigration laws
- The case may set important precedents about the balance of power between federal and local governments
Federal Government Targets “Sanctuary” Policies
The Justice Department has escalated its battle against so-called “sanctuary cities” by filing a lawsuit against four New Jersey municipalities: Newark, Jersey City, Hoboken, and Paterson. The legal action specifically targets these cities’ policies that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities.
According to the lawsuit, these policies effectively shield illegal immigrants from prosecution and deportation by preventing federal agents from accessing vital information about individuals’ immigration status. The DOJ argues that while local governments aren’t required to actively assist with immigration enforcement, they cannot legally obstruct it.
The timing of the lawsuit has raised eyebrows, as it closely follows the dismissal of federal trespassing charges against Newark Mayor Ras Baraka, who was arrested during a protest at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention center. All four mayors named as defendants – Ras Baraka, Steven Fulop, Andre Sayegh, and Ravi Bhalla – are Democrats, with Fulop and Baraka currently competing in the Democratic primary for Governor. This political context has led some to question the Justice Department’s motivations for pursuing the case at this particular moment.
Jersey City gets sued for being a sanctuary city — I guess MAGA ran out of conspiracy theories for the week. Here is the truth: Jersey City’s policies protect families, reflect our values and have led to record low crime rates. As governor, I won’t be bullied. We’ll fight this —… https://t.co/d22Nhw24JM
— Steven Fulop (@StevenFulop) May 23, 2025
Mayors Push Back Against Federal Claims
The Mayors of the targeted cities have forcefully rejected the allegations in the lawsuit. Jersey City Mayor Steven Fulop learned about the legal action through social media and didn’t mince words in his response: “I think it’s a political sideshow. It’s a stunt.” Similarly, Newark Mayor Ras Baraka called the lawsuit “absurd” and has pledged to contest it vigorously. The Mayors argue that their cities aren’t actively preventing federal agents from performing their duties, but rather exercising their right not to allocate local resources to federal immigration enforcement.
“While states and local governments are free to stand aside as the United States performs this important work, they cannot stand in the way, And where inaction crosses into obstruction, local governments break federal law,” the lawsuit says.
Baraka has further defended his city’s position by pointing to previous court rulings that have established local governments are not obligated to enforce federal immigration laws. “No one is blocking them from doing anything. The courts have already said that it’s not an obligation of…you know…to execute federal laws to allow these people to do what they are doing,” Baraka stated. “They can do what they want to do outside of us.” This stance reflects the broader argument from sanctuary jurisdictions that cooperation with ICE is voluntary, not mandatory.
DOJ sues Newark, three more New Jersey cities over sanctuary policies: ‘A frontal assault’ | Josh Christenson & Jennie Taer, New York Post
The Department of Justice sued four New Jersey cities Thursday for allegedly obstructing federal immigration authorities with their… pic.twitter.com/Yho5rKjKak
— Owen Gregorian (@OwenGregorian) May 25, 2025
National Security Concerns vs. Community Trust
Federal officials maintain that sanctuary policies compromise national security and protect individuals who should face deportation after committing crimes. The lawsuit specifically targets municipal ordinances that prohibit local law enforcement from sharing information about individuals’ immigration status with federal authorities. This practice, according to the DOJ, directly violates federal law which forbids state and local governments from restricting the sharing of such information with federal immigration officials.
Defenders of sanctuary policies argue they’re necessary to maintain trust between immigrant communities and local government, including law enforcement. When immigrants fear that any interaction with police could lead to deportation, they may be less likely to report crimes or cooperate with investigations, potentially making entire communities less safe. This tension between federal immigration enforcement priorities and local public safety concerns lies at the heart of the dispute. The outcome of this lawsuit could significantly impact how cities across the nation approach immigration enforcement cooperation going forward.
