The Trump administration's legal bid to invalidate New York City's sanctuary city laws is likely to fail in the courts, according to several legal scholars who spoke to Gothamist.
The legal scholars said the challenge is based on shaky legal theories. Even if it were to get as far as the U.S. Supreme Court — where conservatives hold a supermajority — it might not be upheld, one of the legal experts said.
The Department of Justice sued the city last week, alleging its sanctuary city policies create obstacles for federal authorities to enforce immigration law. The city's sanctuary policies generally bar city agencies from sharing information about immigrants with federal authorities. They also prevent the Department of Correction from honoring an ICE detainer unless immigration authorities present a judicial warrant. The lawsuit seeks to invalidate the policies and permanently block them from being enacted in the future.
The suit pits the Trump administration against Mayor Eric Adams, who has cozied up to federal authorities as he seeks re-election as an independent. Adams has expressed a willingness to collaborate on immigration enforcement in the city after the Department of Justice dismissed his federal corruption case.
Yasmine Farhang, director of advocacy at the Immigrant Defense Project, said the DOJ's lawsuit was an escalation of Trump's mass deportation agenda.
"They are continuing to challenge the protections that people, both in New York and other cities and states around the country, have clearly mandated their local governments to uphold," Farhang said.
The suit is also on questionable legal ground, according to legal experts.
It's similar to an unsuccessful legal challenge Trump waged against California during his first term in office, said Peter Markowitz, director of Cardozo School of Law's immigration justice clinic.
Markowitz said this suit is based on similar legal theories that didn't hold up.
"That [California] case went all the way up to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and the theories were universally, resoundingly rejected," Markowitz said.
Barbara McQuade, a law professor at the University of Michigan, said the lawsuit's allegation that sanctuary city policies violate the power of federal law outlined in the Constitution's supremacy clause, which establishes that federal law takes precedence over any conflicting state laws, is not applicable.
"The supremacy clause prevents a state or local government from enacting its own laws that conflict with federal law, but as long as New York is simply minding its own business, its independent sovereignty should prevail," McQuade said.
"I think this lawsuit is an effort to intimidate cities into compliance with Trump's will," she added.
Lenni Benson, the chair of immigration and human rights law at New York Law School, agreed that the legal argument has flaws.
"This lawsuit is more about the optics and the politics than it is truly about needing to enforce the Supremacy Clause," she said.
Markowitz added that even if the lawsuit makes its way to the heavily conservative Supreme Court, there's no guarantee it will be upheld.
"The foundational case upon which the legal theory of sanctuary laws is built is a case written by Justice Antonin Scalia," Markowitz said, referring to the longtime conservative Supreme Court justice, a Reagan appointee. "He said the federal government cannot do precisely what the federal government is trying to do. It cannot draft into service local and state actors to do the federal government's bidding."
In response to the lawsuit, City Hall spokesperson Kayla Mamelak Altus said in a statement that Adams "supports the essence of the local laws put in place by the City Council" restricting cooperation with ICE, "but he has also been clear they go too far when it comes to dealing with those violent criminals on our streets and has urged the Council to reexamine them to ensure we can effectively work with the federal government to make our city safer."
"So far, the Council has refused," she said.
In response to City Hall's position, Farhang said it's clear sanctuary city policies make the city safer for residents because they allow undocumented people to contact police and other authorities without fear of deportation.
"I think most New Yorkers see right through what the mayor is saying about safety," Farhang said. "We know that he not only has made our city less safe, but he has made New Yorkers more scared and more uncertain about what they can expect from the local government."
Comments
Post a Comment