Feds Sue New Haven Over Sanctuary Policies

The federal government sued New Haven on Monday over what it calls the city’s “sanctuary policies,” naming Mayor Justin Elicker, Gov. Ned Lamont, state Attorney General William Tong, and the State of Connecticut as defendants in an 83-page complaint filed by the U.S. Department of Justice.

Elicker pushed back Tuesday, calling the lawsuit’s claims “untrue” and “misleading.” His core argument: New Haven’s own policy already requires city employees to follow federal law.

The complaint identifies the United States of America as plaintiff and takes direct aim at two specific policies. One is Connecticut’s “Trust” Act. The other is New Haven’s “Welcoming City” executive order, which Elicker signed in July 2020 during his first year in office.

What the Feds Are Arguing

The DOJ contends that New Haven’s executive order conflicts with federal immigration enforcement and is “expressly preempted” by federal statute, specifically citing 8 U.S.C. §§ 1373 and 1644. The complaint argues the order unlawfully blocks information sharing with federal immigration authorities and rejects “congressionally authorized means of enforcing federal immigration law, including detainers and administrative warrants.”

U.S. Assistant Attorney General Brett Shumate is quoted in Tuesday’s DOJ press release: “For years, Connecticut communities have paid the price of these misguided sanctuary policies. This lawsuit seeks to end such open defiance of federal law.”

That framing is aggressive. But the actual text of the Welcoming City order is more careful than the federal complaint lets on.

What the Order Actually Says

The July 2020 order prohibits city employees from inquiring about or trying to “ascertain” a person’s immigration status “unless required by state or federal law.” It also bars the city from making immigration-related arrests. Not a blanket refusal to cooperate, then. A qualified one.

Elicker made that distinction explicit Tuesday. The welcoming order, he said, specifically requires city employees to follow federal law. His position is that New Haven isn’t defying Washington. It’s just not volunteering its police force as an arm of Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

New Haven’s posture on this isn’t new. The city has restricted local law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration authorities for years, long before Elicker took office, by barring local police from singling out residents solely because of their immigration status.

The Police Department’s Take

Acting Police Chief David Zannelli addressed the issue directly during a recent press conference about his appointment as the city’s next permanent chief.

“We don’t care about somebody’s documentation status. We care” about public safety, he said.

That philosophy matters practically. New Haven has a significant immigrant population, and police officials have long argued that enforcing immigration law at the local level damages the trust that makes community policing work. If residents fear that calling 911 will trigger a deportation, they don’t call. Crimes go unreported.

Connecticut in the Crosshairs

The inclusion of Lamont and Tong as defendants broadens this well beyond a city-level fight. Connecticut’s Trust Act, the state law also named in the complaint, limits when state agencies and police can detain someone based on a federal immigration detainer. The Connecticut Trust Act has been state law since 2013 and was strengthened in subsequent sessions of the General Assembly.

Tong’s office hasn’t indicated whether the state plans to settle or fight, but given the attorney general’s track record of challenging Trump administration policies in court, a vigorous defense seems likely. Lamont has been more cautious about picking fights with Washington.

The New Haven Independent first reported the details of the complaint and the mayor’s response.

What Comes Next

This case will almost certainly take months, possibly years, to resolve. The constitutional questions around federal preemption and local policing authority are genuinely contested, and courts have issued conflicting rulings in similar sanctuary city cases across the country.

For New Haven residents, the near-term practical impact is uncertainty. The city says it won’t change its policies while the suit is pending. Federal officials say they’ll push forward.

Watch for Tong to file a formal response and for civil rights organizations to seek involvement as the case moves through federal court.