The Trump administration isn't just deporting people. It's suing any city or state that tries to set limits on how ICE operates in their own communities.

Since Trump returned to the White House in January 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice has filed 27 lawsuits against more than 20 cities, counties, and states over so-called sanctuary policies, according to the department's own count. In just the past three months, it has sued at least half a dozen places — Connecticut, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, a county in Michigan, and the city of Philadelphia.

An advocate at the National Immigration Law Center called the wave of lawsuits "unprecedented."

What these cities and states actually did

It's worth being clear about what "sanctuary policies" are, because the word gets thrown around to sound scary. In practice, these local laws tend to do three things:

• Restrict immigration enforcement in public spaces.
• Limit how much local police have to help federal immigration agents.
• Bar immigration agents from wearing masks or hiding their identity while on duty.

That last one is a growing flashpoint. Communities have watched masked, unidentified agents grab people off the street, and some have tried to require that agents show who they are. The Trump administration is going to court to stop them.

The Philadelphia case

In April 2026, the Philadelphia City Council passed a package of seven ICE-related bills. One barred immigration agents from wearing masks, concealing their badges, or using unmarked vehicles on the job. The administration sued to block it.

Last week, a federal judge — a Trump appointee — sided with the administration and issued a preliminary injunction stopping that rule from taking effect. The judge leaned on the Constitution's Supremacy Clause, which says federal law outranks state law.

City Council member Rue Landau, who sponsored the package, pointed out that the other six laws are still standing. "If the federal government won't protect their residents, local leaders have the obligation to step up to the plate, and that's exactly what we did here in Philadelphia," Landau said.

Maryland is next

Maryland is the latest state in the crosshairs. Its new law, in effect since May 31, 2026, stops state and local officers from asking about someone's immigration status, and blocks them from detaining or handing a person to federal agents over a suspected immigration violation without a warrant or court order.

Last week the Justice Department sued to kill it, claiming the law's "purpose and effect is to obstruct federal law enforcement." A group tied to the hardline Federation for American Immigration Reform also filed a parallel suit on behalf of 17 county sheriffs — and in places the two lawsuits use identical language.

The state senator who wrote the Maryland law, Democrat Clarence Lam, called the challenge "bogus."

"We as a state are wholly within our right and jurisdiction to be able to place limitations on what state and local law enforcement agencies can do... Our state taxpayer dollars should not go towards having local law enforcement enforce federal immigration law."

Why this matters

Strip away the legal language and here's what's happening: the federal government is using its lawyers, and friendly judges, to force local communities to help with mass deportations — and to make sure ICE agents can keep operating in masks, with no badges, in unmarked cars.

Cities and states aren't required to run the deportation machine for the White House. That's a real limit on federal power, and it's exactly the limit the administration is trying to erase in court. The results so far are mixed — a Biden-appointed judge in New Jersey tossed one suit, while the Trump-appointed judge in Philadelphia sided with the administration. But the strategy is clear, and it's aimed straight at the places that tried to protect their own residents.

When your city passes a law and the federal government sues to overturn it because it dared to ask ICE agents to show their faces, that's not law and order. That's the administration insisting no one is allowed to say no.

Source

This post is based on reporting by Shalina Chatlani for Stateline / States Newsroom (photo: Max Nesterak/Minnesota Reformer).