Federal judge rejects administration efforts to tie state disaster funds to immigration cooperation

A federal judge in Rhode Island ruled Wednesday that President Donald Trump could not punish states that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement efforts by denying them disaster mitigation money. (Elizabeth Frantz/The New York Times)

By ANNA GRIFFIN

A federal judge in Rhode Island ruled earier this week that President Donald Trump could not punish states that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement efforts by denying them disaster mitigation money.

The lawsuit, filed in May by Democratic state attorneys general from Rhode Island, 19 other states and Washington, D.C., challenged the legality of the administration’s withholding of billions of dollars in emergency management grants to states that did not allow law enforcement to cooperate with federal immigration officers, even when doing so would violate state laws.

The suit was prompted by a February directive from Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem ordering agencies under her purview to stop sending federal money to jurisdictions that do not assist the federal government in immigration enforcement. Many of the states involved in the lawsuit have laws or policies that bar local or state police from assisting federal immigration enforcement.

On Wednesday, Judge William E. Smith of U.S. District Court in Rhode Island granted the plaintiffs a permanent injunction in the case. In his 45-page ruling, he rejected the Department of Homeland Security’s contention that the agency was focusing on its core mission of immigration enforcement, and called placing conditions on disaster money “arbitrary and capricious” and unconstitutional.

“Such platitudes cannot substitute for an actual explanation of why it is necessary to attach sweeping immigration conditions to all the grants at issue here,” wrote Smith, an appointee of President George W. Bush.

Rhode Island Attorney General Peter F. Neronha noted that the same coalition of attorneys general had been challenging Trump administration policies in court almost since the moment the president took office in January.

“These cases can feel long and daunting, and we still have a long road ahead of us, to be sure,” Neronha said in a statement. “But today’s decision reminds us that this president cannot impose his will where he does not have the lawsuit power to do so.”

Rob Bonta, the California attorney general, said the ruling also protected state access to Department of Homeland Security grants that help state law enforcement agencies fight terrorism.

“This permanent injunction is a huge win in our case that will protect funding for our communities to defend against terrorist attacks and prepare for emergencies,” Bonta said in a statement. “This is a good day for the rule of law and public safety.”

The administration has not indicated whether it will appeal, though an aide to Noem responded to the ruling in a defiant tone Wednesday evening.

“Cities and states who break the law and prevent us from arresting criminal illegal aliens should not receive federal funding,” Tricia McLaughlin, an assistant secretary with the Department of Homeland Security, said in an email. “The Trump administration is committed to restoring the rule of law. No lawsuit, not this one or any other, is going to stop us from doing that.”