• Chelsea and Somerville are suing to block the Trump administration from cutting federal funding over sanctuary city policies.
• The cities argue the funding threats violate constitutional protections like the 10th Amendment.
• Federal funding supports critical programs unrelated to immigration, such as housing and public safety.

Two sanctuary cities in Massachusetts, Chelsea and Somerville, have asked a federal judge to block the Trump administration from cutting their federal funding. The cities filed a motion in U.S. District Court on Tuesday, seeking an injunction to prevent the enforcement of executive orders and agency directives targeting sanctuary cities.

Sanctuary Cities Push Back on Funding Cuts

The Trump administration has issued several executive orders and directives aimed at penalizing cities that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement. These orders threaten to withhold federal funding from sanctuary jurisdictions. Chelsea and Somerville, both self-declared sanctuary cities, argue that the administration’s actions violate constitutional protections, including the separation of powers and the 10th Amendment.

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10

In a 42-page memorandum accompanying the motion, the cities stated that their choice to limit participation in federal immigration enforcement is based on public safety considerations. “As self-governing cities under the Massachusetts Constitution, Chelsea and Somerville are permitted to make this policy choice,” the memo states. It further argues that the federal government is “coercing them into assisting with federal immigration enforcement,” which the cities claim is unconstitutional.

DHS Directive Sparks Lawsuit

The motion follows a recent directive from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which listed jurisdictions, including Chelsea and Somerville, that allegedly obstruct federal immigration laws. The directive warned these cities to revise their policies or face consequences, including funding loss. After backlash from several jurisdictions and law enforcement agencies, DHS removed the list from its website, but the plaintiffs say the funding threat remains.

According to the memo, Chelsea received over $14 million in federal funding in its last fiscal year, while Somerville received close to $20 million. These funds support critical programs such as housing rehabilitation, food delivery for elderly residents, and roadway safety projects—none of which are related to immigration enforcement.

Executive Orders Under Fire

President Donald Trump’s executive orders, issued earlier this year, aim to prioritize federal funding for cities that comply with immigration enforcement. The cities argue that the new conditions for funding are unrelated to the federal interest in the programs at stake and are “unduly coercive.” Somerville Mayor Katjana Ballantyne said in a statement, “Our community is safer when police focus on preventing crime rather than raiding the local sandwich shop.”

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE THE DUPREE REPORT

The lawsuit also highlights similar legal challenges faced by the Trump administration. In a previous case, a federal court ruled that funding threats against sanctuary cities were “unconstitutionally vague” and violated the Fifth Amendment. However, that ruling was limited to the 16 jurisdictions involved in the case. Chelsea and Somerville are now seeking a broader injunction to protect their funding.

Local Autonomy at Risk

Chelsea and Somerville emphasize that their sanctuary policies are rooted in local governance and reflect the will of their residents. The cities argue that they should not have to choose between maintaining their policies and losing essential federal funding. “Stripping cities of their rights erodes everyone’s rights,” Ballantyne said. “We know that withholding federal funding for no good reason threatens the health and safety of all residents.”

The lawsuit claims that the Trump administration’s actions are part of a broader effort to undermine the authority of local governments. It accuses multiple federal agencies of implementing executive orders through directives that pressure sanctuary cities to comply with immigration enforcement policies.

What Happens Next?

The case is now in the hands of U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, a George H.W. Bush appointee. If the court grants the preliminary injunction, it would block the Trump administration from enforcing its funding threats against Chelsea and Somerville. A ruling in favor of the cities could set a precedent for other sanctuary jurisdictions facing similar threats.

The outcome of this case could have significant implications for the relationship between local and federal governments, particularly regarding immigration enforcement. As the legal battle unfolds, the cities are standing firm in their commitment to their sanctuary policies.

What do you think about this lawsuit? Share your thoughts in the comments below and let others know by sharing this article. Follow The Dupree Report On WhatsApp for more updates.

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10