Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, LITIGATION NEWS, TRENDS—Trump administration lawsuit seeks dismantling of Rochester’s sanctuary city law, policies, (Apr 30, 2025)

By Patricia K. Ruiz, J.D.

The lawsuit stems from a March 2025 incident in which Rochester police officers assisted federal immigration officers, spurring disapproval from the city’s mayor.

A lawsuit by the Trump administration against the City of Rochester, New York, seeks to put an end to Rochester’s sanctuary city policies. The administration alleges that Rochester’s sanctuary city policies discriminate against the federal government in obstructing the federal government’s efforts at immigration enforcement, in violation of the Supremacy Clause, arguing that the federal government has the power to instruct Rochester police on where, how, and whether to act in response to the federal government’s immigration enforcement efforts.

Rochester sanctuary city laws. A resolution by the City of Rochester prohibits city officials, including law enforcement officers, from participating in federal civil immigration enforcement, limiting cooperation with federal enforcement in several ways, including by using its funds or personnel to enforce or to assist in the enforcement of federal immigration policies, “except to the extent specifically required by law and subject to the principles embodied in the Constitutions of the United States and the State of New York.” The resolution provides that the “Police Department shall not engage in” various “activities solely for the purpose of enforcing federal immigration laws[,]” including inquiring about an individual’s immigration status. Additionally, city personnel are prohibited from inquiring about or requesting proof of immigration status or citizenship while providing services or benefits, unless the services or benefits are contingent upon one’s immigration or citizenship status or if inquiries are otherwise lawfully required or the information is needed for a criminal investigation. Rochester also developed policies to implement its sanctuary city laws.

Alleged discrimination, obstruction. The complaint alleges that the U.S. is currently facing a crisis of illegal immigration and that the government’s efforts to stem the crisis are hindered by sanctuary cities, such as Rochester, that refuse to cooperate and share information with federal immigration authorities. Rochester’s sanctuary city laws and policies are illegal, the complaint argues, as they are designed to and do interfere with the government’s enforcement of federal immigration laws, in violation of the Supremacy Clause, which prohibits Rochester and its officials from obstructing the ability of the federal government’s ability to enforce laws that Congress has enacted or to take actions entrusted to it by the U.S. Constitution. The challenged law and policies reflect Rochester’s intentional effort to obstruct the federal government’s enforcement of federal immigration law and to impede necessary consultation and communication between federal, state, and local law enforcement officials, the complaint states.

Recently, after Rochester police officers responded to a call for assistance from federal law enforcement officers, the complaint alleged, Rochester officials reaffirmed the city’s commitment to its sanctuary city policies while criticizing city policy officers’ assistance to federal immigration officers and emphasized that Rochester police officers “do not help or participate in federal immigration activities,” even by responding to a call for assistance by federal immigration enforcement personnel. The complaint states that immigration laws provide for basic principles of cooperation between state and local governments and the federal government. For example, federal authorities must “make available” to state and local authorities “investigative resources... to determine whether individuals arrested by such authorities for aggravated felonies are aliens[.]” However, the complaint alleges, Rochester police officers who do not comply with Rochester’s sanctuary city directives are subject to disciplinary action, creating an obstacle to the federal government’s enforcement of immigration laws.

Preemption. The administration alleged that Rochester’s sanctuary city law and policies are expressly preempted by the requirements of 8 U.S.C. §§1373 and 1644, which state that local governments may not prohibit or restrict information with federal immigration officials regarding the citizenship or immigration status of any individual. The sanctuary city laws and policies are also conflict preempted, standing as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the federal government’s immigration enforcement efforts. The administration further alleges that Rochester’s unlawful regulation of and discrimination against the federal government.

Relief sought. The administration seeks a judgment declaring that Rochester’s sanctuary city laws and policies violate the Supremacy Clause and are therefore invalid. Additionally, it seeks preliminary and permanent injunctions that prohibit Rochester from enforcing the sanctuary city laws.

The U.S. government filed its lawsuit in the Western District of New York; the case is No. 6:25-cv-06226.

News: LitigationNewsTrends WhiteHouseNews Discrimination Immigration ImmigrationNews