Legal action was taken against New York on Wednesday by the Trump administration, marking a new stage in its opposition to how the state handles immigration.
Federal officials claimed that New York’s policies put noncitizens ahead of those born in the country, pushing further the ongoing disagreements between the federal government and certain states on deportation enforcement.
At her first press briefing, Attorney General Pam Bondi directly criticized New York’s “green light” law. That law makes it possible for anyone living in the state to receive a driver’s license, whether they have legal immigration status or not.
Standing with federal agents wearing raid jackets, Ms. Bondi stated firmly that these practices were going to stop moving forward. She declared, “It ends now.”
What the Federal Lawsuit Says About New York’s Policies
The court case was submitted in Albany’s federal court and claims that New York’s law is the most extreme because it forces state agencies to notify immigrants when their data has been requested by federal immigration officers.
According to the lawsuit, this action directly challenges the role and responsibilities of federal immigration authorities.
Governor Kathy Hochul’s team responded by saying that her administration fully supports the removal of dangerous offenders who break law. However, the governor made it clear she does not believe that people who follow the law should be harassed.
She also explained that the law already allows immigration officers to use the Department of Motor Vehicles database, but only if they have a court-approved warrant. Hochul described this as a practical method that most people living in New York agree with. She also said she believes the lawsuit, driven by publicity, will not succeed.
Legal Experts Push Back Against the Federal Government
Interim legal director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, Molly Biklen, responded to the filing by questioning whether the case had any real legal standing. She described it as an unnecessary interference with the state’s authority to make decisions on matters that typically fall under state control.
There were plans for Governor Hochul to travel to Washington the next day for a lunch meeting with President Trump at the White House. This was arranged quickly and quietly, according to someone with knowledge of the matter. But once Bondi revealed plans to sue both the governor and the state, Hochul decided to cancel her trip.
Broader Fight Between Federal and State Governments on Immigration
This lawsuit is part of a wider push by federal authorities to pressure more states into cooperating with immigration-related goals set by President Trump. A similar legal case had already been launched against officials in Illinois.
At the same time, some cities across California, Oregon, and Connecticut took legal action against the Trump administration for attempting to remove funding from places that do not give full cooperation with immigration enforcement.
The argument is based on the clash between federal and state responsibilities. Deportation and immigration policy belong to the federal government. However, many states and cities have passed their laws to reassure residents that local cooperation with law enforcement will not automatically involve immigration authorities.
During Trump’s first term, a similar effort to take away funds from cities that disagreed with federal enforcement did not succeed in court. But Ms. Bondi shared confidence that this new legal approach would win, saying that a ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court would eventually go in their favor.
Warning Sent to Other States
The statement also served as a strong signal not just to New York and Illinois but to other states that may soon face similar lawsuits. Bondi made it clear that more legal action could be expected against states that are not fully cooperating with federal immigration laws.
She issued a clear message: “Any state that refuses to follow federal law should prepare for what’s coming. This Department of Justice is doing what is needed to keep American citizens safe.” The report included additional contributions from Benjamin Oreskes and Luis Ferré-Sadurní.
