On Wednesday, January 22, 2025, a directive from the Justice Department caused consternation among legal experts. The directive gives federal prosecutors the right to target state and local officials who resist the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement, a move critics see as an unprecedented expansion of federal power.
Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove’s memo, spanning three pages, sets up what Elie Honig, CNN senior legal analyst, has termed an “extraordinary” and “very heavy-handed” method of enforcing local compliance with federal immigration priorities. “There’s been a lot of pushback to it,” Honig said on CNN’s “NewsNight,” bringing attention to worries of federal overreach.
The memo sets up a “Sanctuary Cities Enforcement Working Group” to identify and address local policies that hinder federal immigration enforcement. The group will work with U.S. Attorney’s offices nationwide to seek criminal prosecution and civil litigation against jurisdictions that limit cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Legal experts caution that the approach detailed in the memo echoes previously unsuccessful attempts from Trump’s first term to punish sanctuary jurisdictions. During this time, federal courts thwarted several efforts to deny federal funding to cities and states that limited cooperation with ICE, citing constitutional issues.
“What is being threatened is if you commit a crime, if you harbor an illegal alien, which is a federal crime,” Honig explained. “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 contradicts Biden administration policies by instructing prosecutors to pursue “the most serious, readily provable offense” in immigration cases. It also directs FBI Joint Terrorism Task Forces to support immigration operations and mandates Justice Department components to share immigration status information with Homeland Security.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta has labeled the memo as “legally suspect” and pledged to protect state sovereignty. During Trump’s first term, California successfully contended that obliging state law enforcement to aid federal immigration agents violated the Tenth Amendment.
Constitutional law experts point to the anti-commandeering doctrine as a significant hurdle to implementing the directive. This doctrine, upheld by several Supreme Court rulings, prevents the federal government from forcing states to enforce federal laws or policies.
The memo cites concerns about fentanyl trafficking, international gang activity, and crimes committed by undocumented immigrants as justification for its aggressive stance. However, critics argue that these same arguments failed to sway the courts during previous legal challenges to Trump’s immigration policies.
The directive’s release has already prompted legal challenges from various states. New York and Illinois Attorneys General have announced their intent to fight any attempt to coerce compliance with federal immigration enforcement, citing successful legal precedents from past court battles during Trump’s first term.
“We are not required to take part in immigration enforcement efforts,” California Attorney General Bonta declared on CNN. Nonetheless, not all Democrats are opposed. On Wednesday, January 22, forty-six House Democrats—approximately one-fifth of the caucus—joined 217 Republicans in passing a bill that mandates the detention and deportation of undocumented immigrants accused of theft.