Key Takeaways
• On May 29, 2025, DHS listed Connecticut and six cities as sanctuary jurisdictions amid federal immigration enforcement disputes.
• Connecticut’s amended Trust Act limits local police cooperation with ICE to serious crimes or judicial warrants only.
• Officials strongly reject ‘sanctuary’ label; DHS threatens funding cuts, but Connecticut plans to challenge legally.
On May 29, 2025, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released a sweeping list of over 500 so-called “sanctuary jurisdictions” across the United States 🇺🇸. This list included the entire state of Connecticut and six of its cities: Hartford, New Haven, New London, Hamden, East Haven, and Windham. The move, part of President Trump’s renewed push to pressure states and localities accused of blocking federal immigration enforcement, quickly sparked a heated response from Connecticut’s top officials. State leaders, including Governor Ned Lamont and Attorney General William Tong, immediately rejected the “sanctuary” label, calling it both inaccurate and meaningless under state law.
This development has brought the debate over “sanctuary jurisdictions” back into the national spotlight, raising questions about what the term really means, how Connecticut’s laws work, and what the practical effects could be for immigrants, law enforcement, and local communities.
What Happened: Connecticut Named on DHS Sanctuary List
The DHS list, released on May 29, 2025, is the latest step in President Trump’s campaign to increase mass deportations and pressure states and cities to cooperate more closely with federal immigration authorities. Connecticut’s inclusion on this list, along with several of its cities, was based on the state’s policies limiting when local police can work with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Key facts:
– Date of DHS List Release: May 29, 2025
– Connecticut Jurisdictions Named: The state itself, plus Hartford, New Haven, New London, Hamden, East Haven, and Windham
– Number of “Sanctuary Jurisdictions” Nationwide: Over 500, according to DHS
The Trump administration argues that these jurisdictions are putting public safety at risk by refusing to fully cooperate with ICE, especially when it comes to detaining or turning over people who may be in the country without legal status.
Connecticut’s Response: Strong Rejection of the “Sanctuary” Label
Within hours of the list’s release, Connecticut’s top officials pushed back hard. Governor Ned Lamont stated, “Connecticut has been falsely labeled. Nothing about this makes Connecticut a ‘sanctuary’ in any legal or practical sense – it makes our state one that upholds the Constitution, respects the rule of law, and prioritizes the safety and well-being of our communities.” Attorney General William Tong echoed this, saying, “There is nothing in our laws or statutes that says Connecticut is a ‘sanctuary’ state. We are not, that is a meaningless term.”
Local leaders also weighed in. New London Mayor Michael Passero said his city is not a “sanctuary jurisdiction” and believes its inclusion on the list was a mistake.
What Is a “Sanctuary Jurisdiction”?
The term “sanctuary jurisdiction” is not defined in federal law. It is used by federal officials, including President Trump and DHS, to describe states or cities that limit how much local police can help enforce federal immigration laws. However, legal experts point out that this label has no precise legal meaning and is often used for political reasons.
Connecticut’s Legal Position:
– Connecticut does not have any law or statute that officially makes it a “sanctuary state.”
– The state’s main law on this topic is the Trust Act, which sets rules for when local police can work with ICE.
– State officials say their policies follow federal law and the U.S. Constitution.
The Trust Act: How Connecticut Handles ICE Requests
Connecticut’s Trust Act, first passed in 2019 and amended on May 27, 2025, is at the heart of the debate. The law limits when state and local police can honor requests from ICE to hold someone in jail (called “detainers”) or share information about them.
Key Features of the Trust Act (as of May 2025):
- Limits on Cooperation: Police can only honor ICE detainers if the person has been convicted of certain serious crimes or if ICE provides a judicial warrant (a court order signed by a judge).
- Expanded List of Crimes: The 2025 amendments added 13 more offenses, such as sexual assault and child endangerment, to the list of crimes that allow police to cooperate with ICE.
- Legal Recourse: If police break these rules, the affected person can sue the city or town and recover legal fees if they win.
- Broader Definition of Law Enforcement: The law now covers not just police, but also parole board members and prosecutors.
Step-by-Step: How the Trust Act Works
1. ICE Detainer Received: Local police get a request from ICE to hold someone.
2. Review of Offense: Police check if the person was convicted of a serious crime on the expanded list.
3. Judicial Warrant Requirement: If not, police can only hold the person if ICE has a judicial warrant.
4. Legal Recourse: If police cooperate with ICE beyond what the law allows, the person can sue and may get legal fees paid.
For the full text of the Trust Act and its amendments, readers can visit the Connecticut General Assembly’s official website.
Why Did Connecticut Get Labeled a “Sanctuary Jurisdiction”?
The Trump administration says that any state or city that limits cooperation with ICE is a “sanctuary jurisdiction.” DHS Secretary Kristi Noem stated, “These sanctuary city politicians are endangering Americans and our law enforcement in order to protect violent criminal illegal aliens.”
However, Connecticut’s leaders argue that their laws are designed to protect everyone’s rights and to make sure police focus on serious crimes, not immigration enforcement. They also point out that the Trust Act still allows cooperation with ICE in cases involving serious crimes.
Political Reactions and Stakeholder Perspectives
State Officials
- Governor Ned Lamont: Strongly denies the “sanctuary” label, says Connecticut follows the Constitution and prioritizes public safety.
- Attorney General William Tong: Calls the term “meaningless,” says state law is fully compliant with federal requirements, and promises to fight any federal attempts to cut funding.
Local Officials
- New London Mayor Michael Passero: Says his city is not a sanctuary jurisdiction and should not have been included on the list.
Federal Officials
- DHS Secretary Kristi Noem: Accuses Connecticut and other listed jurisdictions of putting the public at risk by protecting people who are in the country without legal status and have committed serious crimes.
Republican State Lawmakers
- House Republican Leader Vincent Candelora: Calls the Trust Act “reckless.”
- Senate Republican Leader Stephen Harding and Sen. Rob Sampson: Claim Connecticut is a “super sanctuary state” and say the law goes too far in limiting cooperation with ICE.
Immigrant Advocacy Groups
- Support the Trust Act’s protections for immigrants but wish the recent amendments had gone further, especially to stop ICE from making arrests at courthouses.
What Are the Practical Effects for Immigrants and Communities?
For immigrants in Connecticut, the Trust Act provides important protections. Local police cannot hold someone for ICE unless the person has been convicted of a serious crime or ICE has a judicial warrant. This means that most immigrants who have not committed serious crimes are less likely to be detained by local police for immigration reasons.
Recent changes to the law:
– Expanded exceptions: More crimes now allow police to cooperate with ICE, which could mean more people are at risk of being detained if convicted of those offenses.
– Legal rights: Immigrants can now sue if their rights under the Trust Act are violated, which gives them a way to hold local governments accountable.
For local communities, the law aims to build trust between immigrants and police. Supporters say that when immigrants are not afraid to talk to police, everyone is safer because crimes are more likely to be reported and solved.
Federal Pressure and Possible Consequences
DHS has said that every jurisdiction on the new list will get a formal letter demanding that they change their policies to match federal immigration law. The Trump administration has threatened to cut federal funding to states and cities that do not comply, but so far, no specific penalties have been announced.
Connecticut officials say they are ready to fight any federal attempt to withhold money. Attorney General Tong pointed out that Connecticut successfully sued the federal government the last time President Trump tried to cut funding over immigration policies.
Possible outcomes:
– Legal battles: If the federal government tries to cut funding, Connecticut is likely to challenge the move in court.
– Policy changes: The state legislature could make more changes to the Trust Act, depending on what happens in court and in future elections.
– Impact on services: If funding is cut, it could affect public safety, health care, and other services in Connecticut.
The Bigger Picture: National Debate Over Sanctuary Jurisdictions
Connecticut’s situation is part of a much larger national debate over immigration enforcement and the rights of states and cities to set their own policies. President Trump has made cracking down on “sanctuary jurisdictions” a major part of his immigration agenda, promising to increase deportations and punish states and cities that do not fully cooperate with ICE.
In the past, similar efforts to cut funding to sanctuary jurisdictions were blocked by the courts. Legal experts say that the U.S. Constitution gives states and cities some power to decide how much they want to help with federal immigration enforcement.
Recent Developments and Future Outlook
The situation remains fluid. DHS has not yet said exactly what penalties, if any, will be imposed on Connecticut or its cities. Legal challenges are almost certain if the federal government tries to withhold funding.
Other issues are also on the horizon. The federal government recently announced a crackdown on states using Medicaid for undocumented immigrants, which could affect Connecticut’s HUSKY for immigrants program.
Connecticut lawmakers may consider more changes to the Trust Act or related laws, depending on what happens in court and how the political landscape shifts.
Multiple Perspectives: A Quick Comparison
| Stakeholder | Position/Statement |
|---|---|
| Governor Ned Lamont | Denies “sanctuary” label, emphasizes constitutional compliance and public safety |
| Attorney General Tong | Calls “sanctuary” term meaningless, asserts state law compliance |
| DHS Secretary Kristi Noem | Accuses listed jurisdictions of endangering public by protecting “criminal illegal aliens” |
| Republican State Leaders | Criticize Trust Act as reckless, claim Connecticut is a “super sanctuary state” |
| Immigrant Advocates | Support protections but want more restrictions on ICE cooperation |
| Local Mayors (e.g., Passero) | Deny “sanctuary” status, claim inclusion on list is mistaken |
What Should Immigrants and Residents Do Now?
- Stay Informed: Follow updates from the Connecticut Office of the Governor and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for the latest information.
- Know Your Rights: If you are an immigrant in Connecticut, learn about the Trust Act and what it means for you. If you believe your rights have been violated, you may have the right to sue.
- Contact Local Officials: If you have questions or concerns about how local police are handling ICE requests, reach out to your city or town officials.
- Seek Legal Help: If you are facing immigration issues, talk to a qualified immigration lawyer or a trusted community organization.
Conclusion: Ongoing Debate, Uncertain Future
Connecticut’s inclusion on the Trump administration’s “sanctuary jurisdiction” list has set off a new round of debate over immigration policy, state rights, and public safety. State leaders insist that Connecticut is not a sanctuary state and that its laws are designed to protect both immigrants and the broader community. The Trust Act, especially after its recent amendments, continues to shape how local police interact with ICE, balancing public safety with constitutional protections.
The next steps will depend on how the federal government moves forward and whether courts allow any penalties or funding cuts. For now, the Trust Act remains in effect, and Connecticut’s leaders are standing firm in their commitment to both the rule of law and the safety of all residents.
As reported by VisaVerge.com, the situation in Connecticut is being closely watched by other states, advocacy groups, and federal officials. The outcome could have wide-reaching effects on immigration policy across the United States 🇺🇸.
For more information about federal immigration enforcement and the official list of sanctuary jurisdictions, visit the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s website.
Learn Today
Sanctuary Jurisdiction → A state or city limiting cooperation with federal immigration enforcement, often lacking precise legal definition.
DHS → U.S. Department of Homeland Security, responsible for federal immigration enforcement and homeland security.
ICE Detainer → A request from ICE asking local police to hold a person pending immigration proceedings.
Trust Act → Connecticut law restricting local police cooperation with ICE, focusing on serious crimes or court orders.
Judicial Warrant → A court-issued order authorizing police to detain someone in immigration enforcement cases.
This Article in a Nutshell
DHS included Connecticut and six cities on its sanctuary list, triggering state leaders’ rejection. The amended Trust Act restricts local ICE cooperation, balancing immigrant protections with public safety amid political debates and federal pressure. Legal battles over funding cuts and policy changes remain likely as immigration enforcement tensions grow nationwide.
— By VisaVerge.com
