The so-called "Sanctuary" policies of Illinois and Chicago shielding illegal immigrants from federal immigration enforcement have created a system that incentivizes illegal immigration to the U.S., violating the principles of the nation's founding charter and placing a heavy burden on the entire country, and must be ordered to end, a coalition of 23 states have said in court.
On April 8, attorneys general from nearly two dozen states filed a brief in Chicago federal court in support of a legal action from the Trump administration, seeking a court order forcing the state of Illinois, the city of Chicago and Cook County to comply with federal immigration law and allow local government and police agencies to again cooperate with federal immigration authorities seeking to deport criminal illegal aliens.
"Many States still (rightly) worry that so-called sanctuary policies in a minority of States will incent illegal immigration that affects all States," the coalition wrote in their brief. "That risks the welfare of everyone, including lawful citizens and legal aliens, and it breaches the bargain the Constitution itself struck."
Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul
| kwameraoul.com
The brief was authored by the office of Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost. Others signing the brief include the attorneys general of Indiana, Iowa, Missouri, Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming.
The brief comes as a federal judge is considering a motion from Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul to dismiss the lawsuit brought by the Justice Department under President Donald Trump.
The lawsuit, filed in February, seeks to block Illinois, Chicago and Cook County from continuing to enforce their so-called "Sanctuary" laws and ordinances. Those include the state's so-called Way Forward Act and TRUST Act, as well as Chicago's "Welcoming City" ordinance and its equivalent enacted by Cook County.
The lawsuit particularly took aim at provisions in those laws and ordinances which generally forbid local and state police from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement efforts.
The provisions, for instance, stop police and correctional officials from honoring requests from immigration officials to hold illegal immigrants convicted of any crime, including violent crimes, until immigration officials can pick them up to remove them from Illinois and the U.S.
All of the targeted measures were enacted in recent years by the Democrats who dominate Springfield and Chicago, with the stated goal of protecting illegal immigrants from deportation by directing state and local agencies to no longer cooperate with federal immigration authorities.
In the lawsuit, the Justice Department asserts state and local officials are using their local laws to effectively thumb their noses at federal immigration law.
In response, Illinois quickly filed a motion to dismiss. In that filing, Raoul did not deny directly the Justice Department's accusations. Rather, the Illinois attorney general has argued states like Illinois have the constitutional authority to complicate federal agencies' immigration enforcement tasks, if they so desire.
"... Yes, Illinois's choice may 'frustrate' implementation of 'federal schemes,' like the current federal executive's (President Donald Trump's) avowed commitment to conduct the largest mass deportation in American history," Raoul's office wrote in its March 4 response.
"But this frustration is not obstacle preemption when the Tenth Amendment protects Illinois's sovereign right not to cooperate in the President's schemes."
While a federal judge considers Raoul's request, the other states have joined the fray on the side of the Trump administration.
In their new filing, the 23 state attorneys general - all Republicans - urged the court to block Illinois' "Sanctuary" laws and provisions and require the state to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement efforts.
In the brief, they note that at the time of the nation's founding, states agreed to hand over control of immigration and naturalization to the federal government. They argued this agreement, which was codified in the U.S. Constitution, means states are not free to enact policies which shield immigrants from federal policies with which those states may disagree.
They further noted courts have blocked states from again attempting to take on immigration enforcement if it would exceed federal law.
So, the 23 states argue, the inverse should apply to states which seek to ignore federal immigration law.
The states noted that under the administration of former President Joe Biden, lax immigration policies allowed millions of illegal immigrants to flood across the nation's borders. They noted this has imposed "staggering" costs across the country, which they said were "conservatively estimated" in 2023 at $151 billion per year.
"That cost is disproportionately paid by the States and their political subdivisions, which now spend over $115 billion on illegal immigrants each year, and shoulder 'the fiscal burden of illegal immigration at every level and across nearly all aspects of life' - healthcare, education, housing, social welfare, and criminal justice," the attorneys general wrote.
The brief noted public school systems, health and hospital networks, and housing markets throughout the country have struggled to adapt to the rapid arrival of illegal immigrants in recent years.
And they echoed concerns expressed by the Justice Department about increases in crime nationwide as a result of the illegal immigration surge under Biden.
They asserted the Biden administration did little to address the problems until the months leading up to the 2024 elections, which were won by Trump, largely as a result of voters' concerns about the impacts of illegal immigration.
"The federal government is now course correcting, but Defendants (Illinois, Chicago and Cook County) seek to block those efforts by barring federal agents from accessing illegal aliens in State or local custody," the attorneys general wrote. "... The access bar protects criminal offenders from removal."
"When States like Illinois enact laws to encourage illegal immigration and shield illegal aliens from detection, all States pay the price - including the many like (the 23 states) that want enforcement of the national immigration laws," they wrote. "... One state's policy encouraging illegal immigration always spills over to other states. The immigration tsunami of 2023 forced those cities to make explicit what has always been beneath the surface - that encouraging illegal immigration imposes nationwide costs."
As of April 14, Raoul and Illinois had not yet responded to the 23 states' filing.