The U.S. Department of Justice sued Maryland on Thursday, alleging that the state’s so called sanctuary policies are illegally obstructing the federal government’s immigration enforcement efforts in the latest salvo of a nationwide legal campaign against Democratic led jurisdictions. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche directed the DOJ’s civil division to identify state and local laws that “facilitate violations of federal laws or impede lawful federal operations,” and the lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland Northern Division specifically targets the state’s Community Trust Act and related measures that limit cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The office of Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown declined to comment on the litigation.
The lawsuit centers on Maryland’s recently enacted Community Trust Act, which took effect in June 2026 after Governor Wes Moore allowed it to become law without his signature. The legislation requires a judicial warrant for local law enforcement to detain individuals on behalf of ICE, prohibits correctional facilities from prolonging detention for immigration purposes without such a warrant, and bars police from proactively contacting ICE about someone’s immigration status unless that person is a convicted felon. The act is considered a companion to Maryland’s ban on 287(g) agreements, contracts that deputize local officers to perform federal immigration enforcement, which Moore signed earlier this year despite pushback from 17 of the state’s 24 sheriffs. The DOJ contends these policies violate the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, arguing that “such blatant disregard for federal laws is not merely a political disagreement or passive abstention, it is deliberate, disruptive action that jeopardizes public safety for all Americans.”
The Maryland case is part of a broader administration strategy that has seen the DOJ file similar lawsuits against Illinois, New York City, Rochester, and multiple New Jersey cities, while also publishing a list of sanctuary jurisdictions that includes 13 states, 4 counties, and 18 cities. The administration applies the “sanctuary” label broadly to any state or locality with laws restricting cooperation with ICE, a practice that rights groups say violates due process and free speech rights while creating an unsafe environment for ethnic minorities who fear racial profiling. The sanctuary movement itself dates back to the 1980s, when U.S. churches sheltered Central American migrants fleeing civil strife. Under Trump, the crackdown has expanded beyond illegal immigration to include making legal immigration more difficult through new fees for work visa applicants, with the president arguing his actions are necessary to improve domestic security and protect American jobs.
The legal battle in Maryland highlights the tension between federal immigration priorities and state level efforts to define the role of local law enforcement. Governor Moore has defended Maryland’s approach, stating that “we will not let untrained, unqualified, and unaccountable ICE agents deputize our law enforcement officers to do immigration work,” while emphasizing that the state will continue cooperating with federal partners on public safety. Attorney General Brown had previously issued guidance reminding local police that they remain bound by state law when working with federal agencies and may not enforce civil immigration laws. With the DOJ now seeking judicial intervention to compel compliance, the case is poised to become another test of whether the Supremacy Clause can override state laws that limit local participation in federal deportation operations, a question that will likely shape the boundaries of immigration enforcement for years to come.
