Boston moves to dismiss federal lawsuit over 'sanctuary city' policy

Grace Zokovitch, Boston Herald on Nov 18, 2025

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

BOSTON — The City of Boston moved to dismiss the federal government’s lawsuit challenging its sanctuary city policy Monday, arguing the policy is constitutionally protected and the U.S.’s lawsuit failed to show a conflict with federal law.

“The Trust Act requires the Boston Police Department to prioritize criminal law enforcement, while leaving civil immigration enforcement to federal officials,” the city’s lawsuit states. “This structure is not, and could not be, in conflict with or preempted by the Immigration and Nationality Act—which creates a system for voluntary state and local cooperation with the federal government. Nor does the Trust Act regulate or discriminate against the federal government. Rather, the Trust Act is an exercise of Boston’s authority protected by the Tenth Amendment.”

The motion follows a lawsuit filed by the Department of Justice on Thursday in Boston federal court against the City of Boston, Mayor Wu, the Boston Police Department, and Police Commissioner Michael Cox.

The DOJ lawsuit took aim at Boston’s Trust Act, passed by the City Council in 2014, arguing that “cities cannot obstruct the Federal Government from enforcing immigration laws.”

The Trust Act limits Boston Police and other city departments from cooperating with ICE on civil immigration detainers while allowing for cooperation in criminal matters.

The city’s motion to dismiss requests the court “dispense with the Complaint, as has every other court to rule on similar claims,” citing a recent federal lawsuit against Illinois, Chicago and Cook Country over their sanctuary city policies and one against the state of New Jersey. Both were dismissed in district court for “failure to state a claim.”

“(D)espite the clear success and legality of the Trust Act, the United States now seeks to override the Act by pressing Supremacy Clause claims it has brought — and, to date, lost — repeatedly against other jurisdictions,” Boston’s motion states.

The defendants claim that the Trust Act has protected public safety by allowing local resources to remain devoted to local priorities like criminal law enforcement and letting “residents, regardless of immigration status, know they can call the Boston Police Department to report crime, participate in the economy, and utilize City services.”

In September, Attorney General Pam Bondi called the city “among the worst sanctuary offenders in America,” arguing the defendants “explicitly enforce policies designed to undermine law enforcement and protect illegal aliens from justice.”

The motion to dismiss walks through the lawsuit’s claims, arguing first the Immigration and Nationality Act — a 1952 federal act broadly consolidating immigration laws — (INA) “permits, but does not require, local participation in immigration enforcement, and the Trust Act merely declines that invitation.”

The motion states that making participation in the enforcement would violate the Tenth Amendment.

The federal case’s reading of the law is called “overbroad” and “expansive” in the motion, noting the law only prohibits limits on sharing “information regarding . . . citizenship or immigration status,” not personal identifying information, like home address, or release date.

“(T)he Complaint suggests that the statutes should be read far more broadly, to reach any limitation on sharing any information that would assist federal immigration officers — including personal and release date information that cannot be disclosed under the Trust Act,” the motion states. “That sweeping reading is at odds with the unambiguous statutory text.”

The city also claims the Trust Act “does not discriminate against or regulate the federal government; it is a neutral policy that regulates only City, not federal, actors, and any incidental impact of the Act on the federal government is permitted by the Tenth Amendment.”

The motions moves to drop Mayor Michelle Wu, Police Commissioner Michael Cox, and the Boston Police Department from the lawsuit, stating that the complaint fails to properly establish them as defendants.

“For these reasons, this Court should dismiss the Complaint with prejudice,” the motion requests.

_____