The Trump administration moves to penalize states and cities it labels “sanctuary jurisdictions,” releasing and revising public lists, threatening funding, and preparing lawsuits. The effort accelerates after President Trump’s April 28, 2025 order, with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Justice Department leading the push.
What changed and why it matters now
On April 28, 2025, President Trump signed Executive Order 18763, directing DOJ and DHS to identify, publish, and penalize jurisdictions that “obstruct” federal immigration laws. The administration says the goal is public safety.
- DHS posted a sweeping list on May 29, then removed it on June 3 after criticism.
- On August 5, 2025, DOJ issued an updated list naming 35 jurisdictions, including 12 states, the District of Columbia, and several large cities.
“No more Sanctuary Cities. They protect the Criminals, not the Victims,” President Trump wrote, adding the White House would work to “withhold all Federal Funding for any City or State” that resists.
Other administration statements:
– DHS Secretary Kristi Noem: “We are exposing these sanctuary politicians who harbor criminal illegal aliens and defy federal law… Sanctuary politicians are on notice: comply with federal law.”
– Attorney General Pam Bondi: “Sanctuary policies impede law enforcement… The Department of Justice will continue bringing litigation against sanctuary jurisdictions.”
Who is on the DOJ list (August 5, 2025)
The DOJ list includes the following states: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Minnesota, Nevada, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, plus the District of Columbia.
Named cities include:
– New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Seattle, Philadelphia, Denver, Portland, Boston, San Francisco, and others.
Named counties include:
– Baltimore County, Cook County, San Diego County, San Francisco County.
Note: The DOJ list follows an earlier DHS posting that was criticized for lacking clear criteria and a process to contest designations.
How designations work now
- Under Executive Order 18763, DOJ and DHS must publish and update a list of jurisdictions that “obstruct” federal immigration enforcement.
- Each jurisdiction receives formal notice and a window to change policies before penalties begin.
- There is no single legal definition of a “sanctuary” jurisdiction. Factors may include:
- Policies limiting cooperation with ICE,
- Noncompliance with immigration detainers,
- Restrictions on information sharing with federal agencies,
- Self-identification as a sanctuary.
What penalties jurisdictions may face
- Loss of federal funds and grants after notice and noncompliance.
- Lawsuits from DOJ seeking court orders to force cooperation.
- Possible criminal exposure for officials under statutes covering obstruction, harboring, conspiracy, or RICO theories.
- Other “measures” suggested by the executive order, potentially including stepped-up enforcement actions.
Warning: Loss of grants and public safety funds could strain local budgets and services.
Local reaction and law enforcement concerns
Local leaders and some law enforcement groups push back, arguing the lists are arbitrary and lack due process. Key concerns:
– Harm to community trust, making immigrant victims and witnesses less likely to report crime.
– The National Sheriffs’ Association has raised concerns about transparency and process.
Why this matters for families and workers
- Residents in listed areas may see more ICE operations near jails and in neighborhoods.
- Cities could lose law enforcement grants and public safety funds, straining local budgets.
- Confusion over benefit access: DHS and DOJ are considering rules to block some public benefits in these areas; specifics aren’t final.
What to expect next
- Lawsuits testing whether the federal government can cut funding or prosecute local officials over cooperation limits. Courts previously blocked similar efforts, but the administration is using broader legal theories now.
- More DOJ litigation is planned.
- Congressional action: Republicans may push penalties; Democrats may defend local control.
- Civil-society responses: Legal and community groups will continue coordinated challenges.
How to check if your community is listed
- Review DOJ’s August 5, 2025 publication for the current list and notices.
- Check statements on your city or county website and ask local officials for confirmation.
- Call your mayor’s office, county executive, or local police department’s community affairs unit if unsure.
Practical steps for immigrants in listed areas
- Know your rights: You do not have to open the door to officers without a warrant signed by a judge. You can remain silent and ask for a lawyer.
- Keep key documents ready: Copies of ID, immigration papers, and contact information for a trusted adult or attorney.
- Create a family safety plan: Decide who can pick up children from school and how to access medications if someone is detained.
- Court and benefits actions:
- If in removal proceedings, attend every court date and keep your address current with the court using Form EOIR-33.
- For work authorization, use USCIS Form I-765.
- If planning international travel with a pending adjustment, consult a qualified attorney before filing Form I-131.
- Always use the official USCIS forms page for current versions and fees.
How policies affect police-community trust
- Police chiefs often report victims and witnesses stay quiet when immigration fears rise.
- Cities with cooperation limits say policies focus local resources on crime, not civil immigration enforcement, which they argue improves safety.
- DOJ and DHS argue noncooperation enables people with criminal records to avoid removal.
The policy debate in simple terms
- Administration’s view: Local noncooperation creates “safe havens” for people who should be removed, risking public safety. Publishing lists and threatening funds aims to force compliance.
- Many states and cities’ view: The Constitution allows local governments to set priorities. Forcing local police to act as immigration agents can harm safety and violate state laws.
Legal landscape and past court fights
- Courts have found the federal government cannot “commandeer” local officers to carry out federal tasks—this precedent will shape new lawsuits.
- Earlier attempts to cut broad funding were often narrowed or blocked by courts. Outcomes now will hinge on judicial review of the executive order and any specific grant conditions.
What community groups are doing
- Providing legal hotlines and clinics to screen people for relief options:
- Asylum, U visas (crime victims), T visas (trafficking survivors),
- Special Immigrant Juvenile Status for certain children,
- Family-based immigration cases.
- Assisting residents in filing change-of-address with immigration courts and preparing emergency plans.
Official information sources
- For policy updates, lists, and statements, check the Department of Homeland Security homepage. It is the most direct source for actions tied to Executive Order 18763.
Guidance for employers, schools, and hospitals
- Employers: Follow I-9 rules but avoid unfair practices targeting noncitizens.
- Schools: Keep student data private unless disclosure is required by law.
- Hospitals: Continue emergency care regardless of immigration status, as required by law.
As reported by VisaVerge.com, the administration’s mix of public lists, litigation threats, and funding pressure represents a more aggressive second-term strategy, even after DHS’s early list was pulled. That tension—speed versus accuracy—will likely figure heavily in courtroom arguments.
If you live in a listed area, connect with trusted local organizations, stay informed through official sites, and keep your documents and plans current. Funding cases can move slowly, but enforcement actions can happen quickly. Staying prepared reduces risk and stress, especially for mixed-status families.
This Article in a Nutshell
