The Department of Justice demanded Illinois and Chicago for not cooperating in migrant arrests

In a new episode of tensions between the federal government and local authorities, the United States Department of Justiceunder the administration of Donald Trumpfiled a lawsuit against the state of Illinoisthe city of Chicagothe county of Cook and the Sheriff’s Office of the latter. According to CBS Newsthe demand, filed on Thursday, accuses these jurisdictions of hinder the application of federal immigration laws through local regulations designed to protect migrants. This legal resource marks the first formal attempt of the Trump administration to counteract local policies that, according to federal migratory operations.

The document presented by the Department of Justice alleges that state and local laws in Illinois and Chicago not only interfere with the implementation of federal immigration regulations, but also They discriminate against the federal government itself. According to the demand, these regulations would have facilitated the release of “Innumerable criminals” that, otherwise, they would have been retained for later deportation.

The department argues that this situation has complicated the arrest of undocumented migrants and has put public security at risk. In response, local authorities defended their policies, ensuring that they comply with federal legislation and are designed to prioritize the safety of their communities.

This judicial action occurs in a context of growing friction between the Trump government and cities that have been declared “Sanctuaries” For migrantsa conflict that reflects fundamental differences over local autonomy against federal power.

According to the Department of Justice, more than 13,000 undocumented migrants were arrested by immigration authorities in Illinois between 2016 and 2025. However, local laws, such as the Illinois Trust Acthave significantly limited cooperation between local and federal agencies, which has generated continuous tensions. This legislation prohibits local forces Share key information with federal immigration authoritiesexcept in cases related to Serious crimes. For the Trump administration, this lack of collaboration is a direct obstacle to the detention and deportation of people who reside irregularly in the country.

The Illinois Trust Act, promulgated in 2017 with the support of a Republican governor, has become one of the main friction points. The law establishes that State and local agencies cannot stop a person solely for an ICE immigration retention request (Immigration and Customs Control Service) without a court order. In a statement, the governor of Illinois, JB Pritzkerdefended the legislation, stating that it is in full compliance with federal laws and that its main objective is to allow forces of the order to focus on the fight against crime, instead of acting as immigration agents.

“The Trust Act reflects the Illinois values ​​and strengthens the relationship between migrant communities and the police, which contributes to greater security for all,” said the governor’s office. In addition, it was argued that mandatory cooperation with immigration authorities could generate distrust between migrant communities, which would make the complaint of crimes and collaboration with the Local Police difficult.

For its part, the cook county sheriff He emphasized that his office does not establish migratory policiesbut operates under current local and state laws. In a statement, a recent case was highlighted in which ICE was notified about The release of a detainee with a federal arrest warrantwho was finally delivered to the immigration authorities. “Our obligation is with the security of the community and compliance with the law, at all levels,” said the Sheriff, stressing that his office will continue to collaborate with federal authorities when there are valid judicial orders.

The mayor of Chicago, Brandon Johnsonalso reacted firmly to the demand, reaffirming the commitment of the city as a cozy place for all its residents, regardless of its immigration status. In a statement, Johnson said that “the security of the inhabitants of Chicago remains a priority,” and added that the city will defend its values ​​against the attempts of the federal government for imposing immigration policies that it considers contrary to the rights of their communities.

The context of this demand is closely linked to the Trump administration guidelines regarding immigration. One day before the presentation of the claim, the Attorney General Pam Bondi ordered suspend federal funds for jurisdictions That, according to their criteria, they illegally interfere with the operations of the Federal Order forces. In a memorandum aimed at prosecutors throughout the country, Bondi urged to take legal measures against those states and localities that do not comply with federal government’s immigration policies.

The document refers to the Supreme clause of the United States Constitution, which establishes that federal laws prevail over state and local. According to the Department of Justice, the laws of Illinois and Chicago They violate this clause by preventing the implementation of federal immigration policies. Emil Boveattached attached attorney general, said in a January memorandum that local authorities are obliged to comply with federal immigration initiatives, regardless of local policies that may exist.

In the weeks prior to the presentation of the lawsuit, senior officials of the Department of Justice, including Emil Bove, traveled to Chicago to personally supervise the operations of application of the immigration law in the city. These actions are part of a broader effort of the Trump administration to reinforce the application of their immigration policies throughout the country, especially in jurisdictions that have adopted protection positions towards migrants.

The legal dispute between the Federal Government and the authorities of Illinois and Chicago promises to be prolonged and complex. While the Department of Justice seeks that a judge invalidates the local laws that it considers obstructive, the state and municipal authorities have made it clear that They are willing to defend their regulations in court. Governor Pritzker recently said that Illinois will continue to legislate to protect his residents, regardless of their immigration status, and that he will fight against any attempt to “erode state autonomy.”

This legal confrontation not only shows tensions between different levels of government in the United States, but also raises fundamental issues about the balance of powers and the scope of the federal authority in immigration matters. As the judicial process progresses, it is expected to have significant implications both for The country’s immigration policy as for the relationship between the federal government and the states that adopt policies contrary to their guidelines.