
On August 18, 2025, a coalition of 20 states and Washington, D.C., filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, accusing it of illegally tying federal crime victim funding to compliance with its immigration enforcement policies.
Led by New York Attorney General Letitia James, the states argue that the Department of Justice (DOJ) is unlawfully imposing conditions on grants meant for crime victims, requiring states to assist with federal immigration efforts, including mass deportations.
The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court in Rhode Island, alleges that these actions violate constitutional principles and threaten public safety by undermining trust between law enforcement and immigrant communities.
The lawsuit targets conditions attached to DOJ-administered grants, such as those under the Victims of Crime Act (VOCA), which provide critical resources for victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, and other crimes.
According to the 73-page complaint, the Trump administration’s new requirements compel states to divert law enforcement resources to civil immigration enforcement, including sharing information about immigrants’ legal status and halting programs that benefit undocumented residents.
These conditions, introduced in March and April 2025, are described as a “funding hostage scheme” that forces states to choose between essential public safety programs and compliance with federal immigration priorities.
Poll Results: Trump’s Latino Voter Support Now Plunges
The Effects of Aggressive Immigration on U.S.
New York AG Letitia James emphasized the stakes, stating, “The Trump administration is holding critical funding hostage to force states to comply with their dangerous and unlawful mass deportation agenda, putting the safety of New Yorkers and all Americans at risk,” as reported by NewsWeek.
The complaint argues that the administration’s actions violate the U.S. Constitution’s separation of powers and the Tenth Amendment, which reserves certain powers to the states.
It asserts that the federal government cannot coerce states into enforcing federal immigration law, a principle upheld by the anti-commandeering doctrine.
Which states are suing the Trump administration over immigration?
The states involved in the lawsuit include California, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, Connecticut, and others, representing a broad coalition of Democratic-led jurisdictions.
They claim that the DOJ’s conditions jeopardize programs like victim compensation and shelter services, which rely on federal funding.
For example, VOCA grants support counseling, legal aid, and emergency housing for crime victims, and any disruption could leave vulnerable populations without support.
The plaintiffs seek a court order to declare the conditions unlawful and block their enforcement.
The lawsuit reflects broader tensions between the Trump administration and states with sanctuary policies, which limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities to foster community trust.
Illinois, for instance, has faced separate legal action from the DOJ over its Way Forward Act, TRUST Act, and Welcoming City Act, which prevent local law enforcement from detaining individuals based solely on immigration status.
ICE is Now Recruiting Teens and Seniors in ‘Desperate Attempt’
Public Opinion and Social Media Reaction
A March 2025 filing by Illinois AG Kwame Raoul argued that these laws protect public safety by encouraging undocumented residents to report crimes without fear of deportation.
Social media reactions on X highlight the controversy’s intensity.
User @lawcrimenews posted, “Trump admin illegally using crime victim funds as a ‘bargaining chip’ to punish states that don’t support its immigration policies,” while @BLaw noted that the states’ lawsuit accuses the administration of unlawfully requiring cooperation with immigration enforcement to access grants.
Supporters of the administration, such as @Sec_Noem, have defended the policies, claiming they prioritize public safety by targeting “criminal aliens.”
The lawsuit comes amid other legal challenges to Trump’s immigration agenda.
In July 2025, the administration eliminated bond hearings for most undocumented immigrants, prompting criticism from immigration lawyers for undermining due process.
Additionally, a May 2025 Supreme Court ruling blocked Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan men accused of gang ties, and federal judges in Maryland have challenged a DOJ lawsuit against a two-day deportation pause as “uniquely disruptive.”
These setbacks underscore the contentious legal battles surrounding Trump’s immigration policies.
As the case proceeds, the coalition of states aims to protect their sovereignty and ensure that federal funds for crime victims are not weaponized for political ends.
The outcome could set a precedent for the balance of power between federal and state governments, particularly in the context of immigration enforcement.
But I’m curious to know what you think, leave your thoughts below.
Also Read: MAGA Now Scrutinize Trump Over Epstein Client List Failure
Visit the Homepage for our extensive library of news, or read news for you below.