logo
Trump administration sues four New Jersey cities over sanctuary policies

Trump administration sues four New Jersey cities over sanctuary policies

Fox News23-05-2025
The Trump administration is suing four New Jersey cities, accusing local officials of obstructing federal law and infringing on efforts to combat illegal immigration through their sanctuary city policies.
The lawsuit by the Justice Department alleged the cities of Newark, Hoboken, Jersey City and Paterson unlawfully obstructed federal authorities trying to fight illegal immigration.
Mayors Ras Baraka of Newark, Ravi Bhalla of Hoboken, Steven Fulop of Jersey City and Andre Sayegh of Paterson are named as defendants, along with the four city councils.
"By intent and design, the Challenged Policies are a frontal assault on the federal immigration laws and the federal authorities that administer them," the complaint states.
Baraka was recently arrested and charged with trespassing outside an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in his city. That case was dropped, but U.S. Rep. LaMonica McIver was later charged with assault during the protest at Delaney Hall.
"The lawsuit against Newark is absurd," Barake said in a statement. "We are not standing in the way of public safety. We are upholding the Constitution, providing oversight, and following the laws and guidelines of the State of New Jersey."
He said nothing in the city's policies prevents law enforcement from doing their jobs. "What we refuse to do is turn our city into an arm of federal immigration enforcement, which the courts have already ruled is not our role," he added.
Acting Assistant Attorney General Yaakov Roth wrote that local policies are designed to "thwart federal immigration enforcement".
"[E]ven where local law enforcement wants to help the United States deal with the nation's immigration crisis, the Challenged Policies impede them from doing so," he wrote. "This not only puts the safety of officers at risk, but also endangers the broader communities they are sworn to protect."
The lawsuit comes after federal charges were filed against Baraka, a gubernatorial candidate, for his role during a May 9 clash involving Democratic politicians at a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention center in Newark.
"Recent events have proven that these New Jersey officials care more about political showmanship than the safety of their communities," said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. "As I have made clear, this Justice Department does not tolerate local officials in sanctuary cities obstructing immigration enforcement: there is more litigation to come."
"We will continue to do what we have always done, protect the rights of all our residents, stand on constitutional ground, and reject fear-based politics that divide communities rather than strengthen them," Baraka said.
"Hoboken is a community that prides itself on its vibrancy, its cultural diversity, and its inclusivity, and we will continue to stand together as a community for what is fair and just," Bhalla said in a separate statement. "The City of Hoboken will vigorously work to defend our rights, have our day in court, and defeat the Trump Administration's lawlessness. To be clear: we will not back down."
"Jersey City gets sued for being a sanctuary city — I guess MAGA ran out of conspiracy theories for the week," Fulop wrote on X in response to the lawsuit. "Here is the truth: Jersey City's policies protect families, reflect our values and have led to record low crime rates. As governor, I won't be bullied. We'll fight this — and win."
Fox News Digital has reached out to Sayegh's office.
The Trump administration has targeted sanctuary jurisdictions as it continues to catch and deport criminal illegal immigrants.
It has filed lawsuits against cities in New York, Colorado and Illinois over attempts to impede immigration enforcement.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Judge rules that Miami election date change was unconstitutional
Judge rules that Miami election date change was unconstitutional

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Judge rules that Miami election date change was unconstitutional

Judge rules that Miami election date change was unconstitutional Miami's decision to postpone its 2025 election to 2026 without voter approval was unlawful and unconstitutional, a judge has ruled. Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge Valerie Manno Schurr on Monday issued a written opinion in a lawsuit filed by Miami mayoral candidate Emilio González. The former city manager sued the city after the Miami City Commission passed an ordinance that postponed the upcoming November 2025 election to November 2026 without voter approval, giving the current elected officials an extra year in office. González had asked the court to find the city's ordinance 'unlawful and invalid.' In her ruling, Manno Schurr declared that the city cannot change the dates of municipal elections or terms of office without voter approval. The city had cited three Florida statutes that allow municipalities to move an election date via ordinance, arguing that state laws supersede local rules. But in her ruling, Manno Schurr disagreed. Manno Schurr pointed to the Miami-Dade County Home Rule Charter, which states that any proposed charter change must be decided by a vote of the electors. Miami's city charter dictates the rules for elections, including the requirement that elections for mayor and commissioner 'shall be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November in odd-numbered years.' Ultimately, Manno Schurr said, the ordinance the city passed 'constitutes an impermissible amendment to the City Charter without a vote of the electorate,' as is required by the Miami-Dade County Charter and the Florida Constitution. The city filed a notice of appeal shortly after Manno Schurr handed down her ruling. The parties are working on a tight timeline, with both sides telling the judge at a Wednesday hearing that they need a final decision, following appeals, by Aug. 8. 'This is not just a victory for me — it is a triumph for all voters in the City of Miami and across Miami-Dade County who believe in upholding our charter and the rule of law,' González said in a statement Monday. 'We are extremely grateful to the Court for its decision in this critical case, which restores the fundamental right to vote and ensures that citizens can shape their own future,' González's attorney Alan Lawson said. '... Our client, Emilio Gonzalez, recognized the far-reaching implications of this case, and we are proud to have worked with him to uphold one of the core guarantees of our Constitution: the right to vote.' In a statement Monday, the Miami City Attorney's Office said: 'While we respectfully disagree with the trial court's decision, we are confident in the strength of our case and remain optimistic about the outcome on appeal.' Commissioner Damian Pardo, who sponsored the ordinance moving the city's elections from odd to even years, agreed with the city's statement and declined further comment 'until the matter is fully resolved.' Politicians react Gov. Ron DeSantis celebrated the judge's ruling in a post on X. 'City of Miami politicians voted to defy term limits, cancel this year's scheduled election, and extend their own terms in office — all without voter approval,' DeSantis said. 'Today, a judge has put the kibosh on the scheme. Great to see the law and common sense prevail.' Miami-Dade County Commissioner Eileen Higgins is among the candidates who had already filed to run for Miami mayor in November 2025. In a statement, Higgins called the ruling 'a clear victory for democracy and for every Miami resident who believes elections should be decided by the people — not politicians.' Higgins added that if voters support moving the city to even-year elections, she's in favor of reducing the mayor's term by one year, ending in 2028 instead of 2029, to achieve that goal. Former City Commissioner Alex Díaz de la Portilla, whom DeSantis suspended from office in 2023, has not formally filed candidate paperwork but confirmed Monday that he intends to run for mayor in November. 'In America, you can't change the rules just to stay in power,' Díaz de la Portilla said. 'The people have the final say. Today's decision proves that. The judge gave the city a chance to choose the right path. Instead, they are choosing to appeal and fight a decision they know is wrong. We the people will choose our next Mayor.' Commissioner Joe Carollo, who has long been teasing a run for mayor, also added his two cents Monday afternoon. 'I voted against this ordinance because there was no doubt in my mind it was illegal and it went against every principal of democracy of our country,' Carollo said. 'But beyond that, it was immoral for us to have given ourselves an extra year in office.' Mayor Francis Suarez, who was a proponent of the ordinance, said through a spokesperson that he agreed with the city attorney's statement, declining further comment. What each side is arguing In two separate 3-2 votes, the Miami City Commission approved an ordinance moving the city from odd- to even-year elections. That meant that the scheduled November 2025 election was postponed to 2026 and that the city's current elected officials would get an extra year in office — even those who are term-limited. Pardo has argued that the change is a reform measure that will substantially boost voter turnout while cutting election costs. Critics, however, have called the move a 'power grab.' In his lawsuit, González likened it to actions carried out by 'regimes in Venezuela, Nicaragua, Bolivia, or Cuba — the very places so many of Miami's people come from.' His attorneys have argued that the city violated its own charter, as well as the county charter and the Florida Constitution, by moving the election without voter approval. The city charter governs the rules for elections, and charter changes generally require voter approval. But the city has argued that passing the ordinance technically didn't change the charter — rather, it changed the city code. Assistant city attorney Eric Eves acknowledged at a hearing last week that the change puts the city charter and code in conflict with each other. Manno Schurr called that argument 'meritless,' saying it 'ignores the effect the Ordinance has on the pertinent provisions of the City Charter.' The city has relied on three Florida statutes that allow municipalities to move an election date via ordinance, as well as a case in the city of North Miami, which similarly moved its elections to even years via a City Council vote and without voter approval a few years ago. That case went up to the Third District Court of Appeal, which upheld a lower court's ruling that the city acted lawfully. The Third DCA ruling did not create binding precedent, however. Solve the daily Crossword

Banishing a reporter: Trump escalates battle with Wall Street Journal over Epstein story
Banishing a reporter: Trump escalates battle with Wall Street Journal over Epstein story

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Banishing a reporter: Trump escalates battle with Wall Street Journal over Epstein story

President Donald Trump on Monday followed up his lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal over last week's Jeffrey Epstein story by banishing one of the newspaper's reporters from Air Force One for an upcoming Scotland trip. The moves reflect Trump's aggressiveness toward media who displease him — even a media magnate, Rupert Murdoch, with outlets that have been friendly to him in the past. Trump filed a $10 billion defamation lawsuit against the Journal and Murdoch on Friday because of the newspaper's article about a sexually suggestive letter bearing Trump's name that was included in a 2003 album compiled for alleged sex trafficker Epstein's birthday. The president has denied having anything to do with it. On Monday, the White House said it was removing a Journal reporter from the pool covering the president's trip this weekend to his golf courses in Turnberry and Aberdeen in Scotland. The Journal's Tarini Parti had been scheduled to cover him on the trip. 'Due to the Wall Street Journal's fake and defamatory conduct, they will not be one of the thirteen outlets on board,' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said. The Journal declined comment on the action. Aggressiveness with the press is in the Trump playbook It's a tactic the Trump White House has used before. It restricted the access of journalists from The Associated Press to press events when the news outlet would not change its style guidelines to reflect Trump's renaming of the Gulf of Mexico. That launched a legal battle that is wending its way through the courts. The defamation lawsuit is another tool Trump has used against media outlets. He has sued CBS News for its editing of a '60 Minutes' interview with former opponent Kamala Harris; ABC News for a false statement made by George Stephanopoulos in a story regarding a New York writer who had accused Trump of sexual abuse; and Meta after it removed Trump's social media accounts following the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. In each of those cases, Trump won multimillion-dollar settlements. But in those instances, news was only one part of a major corporation's business. In the case of Murdoch and News Corp., news is the chief part of his business. The Journal has vowed to fight. It's also the first time Trump has sued for defamation as a sitting president, and it's not clear whether any president has done that in the past. 'There's nothing inherently wrong with a president bringing a libel suit,' said noted free speech attorney Floyd Abrams. 'But this claim certainly seems like nothing more or less than an effort to suppress speech that our president finds discomforting. That's not why we have libel law. It's why we have a First Amendment.' News organizations have reacted in varied ways It's all part of a broader pattern of trying to intimidate news organizations that report stories Trump does not like, said Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University. 'These are lawsuits that have no hope of actually succeeding as lawsuits, but nevertheless have the potential to chill media organizations from doing what all of us need them to do,' Jaffer said. Not every news organization has bowed down; '60 Minutes,' in fact, did some notably tough stories about the early days of Trump's second administration. But it's impossible to quantify stories that weren't done because of fear of a fight with the White House, he said. The Wall Street Journal leans conservative editorially, but hasn't been afraid to take Trump on in both its opinion and news sections. Other Murdoch outlets — Fox News Channel and the New York Post — are much friendlier to him. Ever since the administration announced that it would not be releasing additional government files from the case against Epstein, factions of Trump's base supporters have turned on him. That has put some normally supportive news outlets in a difficult position. Fox News largely avoided the story after Trump suggested his allies stop wasting time on it. But Fox's Howard Kurtz reported on The Wall Street Journal lawsuit on his 'Media Buzz' show Sunday, saying that by doing so, 'the president has drawn extra attention to the Journal's reporting.' The president's battle with the press has taken on several dimensions. He has been fighting to take away government support for news organizations like Voice of America, and last week the Republican-controlled Congress voted to take away federal funding from NPR and PBS because the president says their news programming is biased against conservatives. ___ David Bauder writes about the intersection of media and entertainment for the AP. Follow him at and David Bauder, The Associated Press Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Air District, Alameda County DA sue Radius Recycling over 2023 West Oakland fire
Air District, Alameda County DA sue Radius Recycling over 2023 West Oakland fire

CBS News

time2 hours ago

  • CBS News

Air District, Alameda County DA sue Radius Recycling over 2023 West Oakland fire

The Bay Area Air Quality Management District and Alameda County District Attorney Ursula Jones Dickson filed a joint civil lawsuit Thursday against Radius Recycling over air quality violations stemming from a large fire at its West Oakland facility in August 2023. The suit seeks penalties and an injunction following the Aug. 9-10, 2023 blaze, which regulators say was fueled by the company's failure to follow key fire prevention measures. Investigators found Radius accepted excess scrap metal while its shredder was offline. However, they stored the material in areas lacking water cannons and heat sensors, both required by its air permit, a press release stated. "Radius Recycling's actions endangered the health and well-being of the West Oakland community," said Dr. Philip Fine, executive officer of the Air District. "This lawsuit reflects our commitment to holding polluters accountable." District Attorney Jones Dickson said the action seeks to enforce environmental protections and prevent future toxic emissions in the area, which has long suffered from pollution. Radius was fined $575,000 in 2024 for startup violations but is now operating in compliance.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store