Judge blocks Trump plan to tie states' transportation funds to immigration enforcement
A federal judge on Thursday blocked Donald Trump's administration from forcing 20 Democratic-led states to cooperate with immigration enforcement in order to receive billions of dollars in transportation grant funding.
Chief US District Judge John McConnell in Providence, Rhode Island, granted the states' request for an injunction barring the Department of Transportation's policy, saying the states were likely to succeed on the merits of some or all of their claims.
The Trump administration did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The ruling came in a lawsuit filed by a group of Democratic state attorneys general who argued the administration was seeking to unlawfully hold federal funds hostage to coerce them into adhering to Trump's hardline immigration agenda.
The states argued the US transportation secretary, Sean Duffy, lacked the authority to impose immigration-enforcement conditions on funding that Congress appropriated to help states sustain roads, highways, bridges and other transportation projects.
Since returning to office on 20 January, Trump has signed several executive orders that have called for cutting off federal funding to so-called sanctuary jurisdictions that do not cooperate with US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) as his administration has moved to conduct mass deportations.
Sanctuary jurisdictions generally have laws and policies that limit or prevent local law enforcement from assisting federal officers with civil immigration arrests.
The justice department has filed a series of lawsuits against such jurisdictions, including Illinois, New York and Colorado, challenging laws in those Democratic-led states that it says hinder federal immigration enforcement.
The lawsuit before McConnell, who was appointed by Barack Obama, was filed after Duffy on 24 April notified states they could lose transportation funding if they do not cooperate with the enforcement of federal law, including with Ice in its efforts to enforce immigration law.
The states argue that policy is improper and amounts to an unconstitutionally ambiguous condition on the states' ability to receive funding authorized by Congress as it leaves unclear what exactly would constitute adequate cooperation.
The administration has argued the policy was within Duffy's discretion and that conditions should be upheld as there is nothing improper about requiring states to comply with federal law.
The 20 states are separately pursuing a similar case also in Rhode Island challenging new immigration enforcement conditions that the homeland security department imposed on grant programs.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
35 minutes ago
- The Independent
What's the point of the UK talking to Tehran? More than you might think…
Europe's frantic diplomatic mission in Geneva may go down as one of its most arduous ventures on the world stage – and also one of its most consequential. The foreign ministers of Britain, France and Germany must persuade a battered Iranian regime to kow-tow to the US and Israel over its nuclear ambitions, or face likely annihilation. All three European powers would, of course, love to see the back of supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei's corrupt and brutal theocracy. But they rightly fear the regime's capacity to unleash death and destruction before it goes. If Trump joins Israel in the war on Iran with US bunker-busting bombs on nuclear sites, and it succeeds in killing Khamenei, there will still be plenty of Iranian hardliners left who will be willing to fight to the death. Previous inhibitions will not apply. That could mean use of a dirty bomb in the West, or chaos unleashed in the Strait of Hormuz, through which 90 per cent of the Gulf's oil passes. For the world at large, the stakes are that high. British foreign secretary David Lammy – after meeting his US counterpart, Marco Rubio, and presidential envoy Steve Witkoff in Washington on Thursday – said that the UK was 'determined that Iran must never have a nuclear weapon". He thinks a window now exists within the next two weeks to achieve a diplomatic solution, as Trump dithers over whether to attack the regime, as US neo-cons and Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu are demanding – or whether to heed the no-more-wars mantra of his Maga base. And so, in search of a diplomatic solution, Iran's foreign minister Abbas Araghchi is meeting with his European counterparts in Switzerland. But what can be achieved? For all their good intentions – French president Emmanuel Macron said the diplomats would make a "comprehensive, diplomatic and technical offer of negotiation" to Iran – the Europeans are unlikely to persuade the Iranians to pull back from the brink. At least not on their own. While one Iranian diplomat said Tehran was willing to pursue 'a balanced and pragmatic policy in its dealings with Europe, and engage rationally with both East and West', Araghchi said there will be 'no talks' with the US over Iran's nuclear programme while the Israeli bombardment continues: 'The Americans want negotiations and have sent messages several times, but we have clearly said that there is no room for dialogue.' But there is a useful point to holding talks on neutral ground with Tehran – and it's not simply to ask them nicely and face-to-face if they wouldn't mind stopping with their nuclear enrichment programme. Rather than relaying Trump and Netanyahu's demands to Iran, Geneva is about feeding back to the White House – translating Tehran's position for the US president. The Europeans aren't there to stop the war, they're Trump-whispering for the Ayatollah. It's not clear that European diplomats have the connections they need to have a greater role to play than this, useful though it will prove. But when it comes to a practical breakthrough, some of the Gulf states might, however. Behind the scenes, figures in what some dub 'Iran's deep state' – many of them members of the powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps – are talking to representatives of Oman and Qatar; it might be these Middle Eastern countries that can make the difference, in a second stage of dialogue. Qatar, for its part, will likely hold more sway over Washington than London or Paris. All the peacemakers, though, will be battling the plans of Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Nothing less that the obliteration of the regime in Tehran will satisfy him. Worryingly, Israel's premier appears to have been joined by an increasingly pro-war Fox News, with Sean Hannity this week declaring that Iran 'is the biggest existential threat to the entire western world'. The West should have learnt by now – after the disasters in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya – that enforced regime change in the Middle East is best avoided. Andreas Krieg, a leading Iran expert at King's College London thinks regime change in Iran would 'not be clean or peaceful'. If the current theocracy falls, there is no significant alternative political-social structure to lead this country of 92 million into the light. The IRGC, a ruthless military-industrial complex, would not easily cede control of the Iranian economy. Instead, with 190,000 personnel and a similar number of Basij paramilitaries to call on, it might well create a military dictatorship. The West and Israel would be back to square one. And the Iranian people would be no better off. Ironically, the last time the West brought about regime change in Iran – by booting out, in 1953, the democratically elected premier Mohammad Mosaddegh (for which we have British Petroleum and the CIA to thank) – it laid the groundwork for the emergence of the current Islamic Republic in the 1970s. In between rounds of golf, as he ponders his next steps in the Middle East, you can't help wishing Potus would be shown – by Lammy or anyone else – the relevant pages of a history book. It is within the president's power to unleash hell – or stop history repeating itself. After the Geneva talks, let's hope he listens to what the Trump-whisperers tell him.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
ICE detains green card holder on return from Japan where he was visiting his Air Force member son
A 66-year-old green card holder is in custody in Bakersfield, California, after he was apprehended by ICE last month following a trip to Japan. Victor Avila, who first received his card in 1967, was arrested as he arrived in San Francisco with his wife after the pair had been in Asia to visit their son, a serving member of the US Air Force, according to a GoFundMe page that has been set up. In an interview with ABC San Diego, Vila's daughter, Carina, said that her mother, a US citizen, was allowed to pass through immigration control, but he was kept behind. Carina said that her father was first kept in an ICE office in the airport, 'in a room, sleeping on chairs.' He was later transferred to Bakersfield, some 230 miles from his home. His daughter added that her father received his green card immediately after first legally immigrating to the US with his family from Mexico. Avila, a legal assistant at a workers' compensation law firm, has a minor criminal record stemming from a 2009 arrest for DUI and drug possession, which saw him spend some time in prison. 'Two misdemeanors. Served all his time, paid all he had to pay. Since then, he has been a good man and a hard worker. Hasn't gotten into trouble, not one time. He's dedicated himself to his family,' Carina said. His green card has been renewed twice since then. His family has launched a campaign to secure his release, involving letter-writing and crowdfunding efforts. 'I've visited him several times. There are days he's hopeful, optimistic. Then there's days he mentally prepares himself for the worst. I want my dad back. I want my dad home,' Avila faces a court hearing on July 15. At the time of writing, Avila's GoFundMe page has raised $21,500. According to the most recent update on the page, ICE has initiated deportation proceedings against Avila. Protests over federal immigration enforcement raids have been flaring up around the country. Opponents of Trump's immigration policies took to the streets as part of the 'no kings' demonstrations Saturday that came as Trump held a massive parade in Washington for the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army. Saturday's protests were mostly peaceful. But police in Los Angeles used tear gas and crowd-control munitions to clear out protesters after the event ended. Officers in Portland, Oregon, also fired tear gas and projectiles to disperse a crowd that protested in front of a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement building well into the evening.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Has Trump ‘chickened out' on Iran? Five reasons for his two-week delay
On Tuesday evening, Donald Trump appeared poised to join Israel's war against Iran. Having left the G7 summit in Canada early, he convened an emergency meeting of his national security advisers. JD Vance, his vice-president and a staunch opponent of foreign military entanglements, signalled that the president was contemplating action. Mr Trump issued a series of increasingly bellicose warnings, demanding Iran's 'unconditional surrender'. 'We know exactly where the so-called 'Supreme Leader' is hiding,' he wrote in a social media post. Yet within 48 hours, the president had pulled back. To some observers of US politics, this will seem like another instance of Mr Trump living up to his 'Taco' instincts – 'Trump Always Chickens Out', the acronym that so palpably infuriates him. There are, however, several plausible reasons for delay. Domestic disputes Mr Trump's flirtation with war has sharply divided his base. Maga loyalists, whose foreign policy instincts are overwhelmingly isolationist, are aghast at the prospect of their standard-bearer dragging them into a new conflict, especially after campaigning so forcefully against just such adventurism. 'Anyone slobbering for the US to become involved in the Israel/Iran war is not America First/Maga,' Marjorie Taylor Greene, one of Mr Trump's most ardent Congressional allies, posted on social media.
