The City of Boston has taken steps to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) that challenges its sanctuary city policy. On Monday, Boston’s legal team argued that the policy, known as the Trust Act, is constitutionally protected and does not conflict with federal immigration law. The Trust Act, enacted by the City Council in 2014, aims to limit cooperation between city departments, including the Boston Police Department, and federal immigration authorities.
In its motion to dismiss, the city asserts that the Trust Act prioritizes criminal law enforcement while civil immigration enforcement remains the responsibility of federal officials. The motion states, “This structure is not, and could not be, in conflict with or preempted by the Immigration and Nationality Act, which creates a system for voluntary state and local cooperation with the federal government.” Furthermore, it emphasizes that the Trust Act is an exercise of Boston’s authority protected by the Tenth Amendment.
The DOJ’s lawsuit, filed in federal court in Boston, specifically targets Mayor Michelle Wu, the Boston Police Department, and Police Commissioner Michael Cox. The federal government contends that cities cannot obstruct federal immigration enforcement, arguing that the Trust Act enables local authorities to avoid compliance with immigration laws.
The Trust Act restricts the Boston Police and other city departments from cooperating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on civil immigration detainers, while still permitting collaboration in criminal matters. The city’s motion to dismiss requests the court to “dispense with the Complaint, as has every other court to rule on similar claims,” referencing recent cases in Illinois and New Jersey where similar lawsuits were dismissed.
Boston’s legal team argues that the Trust Act has been vital in maintaining public safety by allowing local resources to focus on law enforcement priorities. They assert that the policy fosters trust within the community, enabling residents, regardless of immigration status, to report crimes and access city services without fear of deportation.
In a previous statement, Attorney General Pam Bondi criticized Boston, labeling it “among the worst sanctuary offenders in America.” She claimed that the city’s policies undermine law enforcement efforts and protect individuals in the country illegally.
The motion to dismiss counters the DOJ’s interpretation of the law, arguing that the Immigration and Nationality Act, a federal law established in 1952, allows but does not mandate local involvement in immigration enforcement. The city contends that requiring participation would violate the Tenth Amendment.
Boston’s attorneys describe the federal case’s reading of the law as “overbroad” and “expansive,” asserting that the law only prohibits limitations on sharing information regarding citizenship or immigration status, not personal identifying information. They argue that the DOJ’s complaint suggests an interpretation that conflicts with the statutory text.
The city maintains that the Trust Act does not discriminate against or regulate the federal government; rather, it is a neutral policy that governs only city actors. The motion also seeks to remove Mayor Wu, Police Commissioner Cox, and the Boston Police Department as defendants, stating that the complaint does not adequately establish their roles in the lawsuit.
For these reasons, Boston’s legal representatives are requesting the court to dismiss the complaint with prejudice, asserting the legality and effectiveness of the Trust Act in serving the community. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for sanctuary city policies across the United States.
