California v. Department of Transportation
AGs sued the Department of Transportation for threatening to cut off billions in transportation funding to states that do not fully comply with the Trump administration's anti-immigrant directives.
- Categories
- Date Filed May 13, 2025
- Litigation Status Success: Challenged policy temporarily blocked
On April 24, 2025, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy announced that the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) would cut off funding to any state that refuses to comply with the Trump administration’s immigration agenda – a directive that threatens essential infrastructure projects nationwide. California Attorney General Rob Bonta, Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul, New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin, Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha, and Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown led a coalition of 20 attorneys general in filing a federal lawsuit in Rhode Island against the Department of Transportation for conditioning billions of dollars in critical transportation funding on state cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.
For over a century, Congress has provided federal funding to states to develop and maintain safe, reliable, and effective transportation infrastructure. Each year, state and local governments receive over $100 billion to build and maintain roads, highways, railways, airways, and bridges that connect communities and help residents travel to work and home. All of this funding is congressionally allocated, with no statutory immigration enforcement conditions attached. The coalition argued that the administration’s attempt to tie federal transportation funds to immigration enforcement violates the constitutional separation of powers. The attorneys general contend that the directive has no legal basis and is unconstitutionally coercive, forcing states to choose between diverting state and local law enforcement to support federal immigration enforcement and receiving essential federal funding. What’s more, the directive would compel states to channel their own resources into carrying out a federal agenda at the expense of prioritizing local community safety needs.
On June 19, 2025, the court granted a preliminary injunction blocking the DOT’s imposition of immigration enforcement conditions on grant funding.
Once again, the administration is attempting to seize Congress’ power of the purse – this time at the expense of immigrant communities and vital infrastructure projects. DOT’s blatant overreach threatens to divert critical resources away from public safety and undermine projects that keep our communities connected and safe. We won’t allow the federal government to hold essential funding hostage to advance a political agenda. Attorney General Tish James
Case Details
AG Posture
PlaintiffPlaintiffs
- California
- Illinois
- New Jersey
- Rhode Island
- Maryland
- Colorado
- Connecticut
- Delaware
- Hawaii
- Maine
- Massachusetts
- Michigan
- Minnesota
- Nevada
- New Mexico
- New York
- Oregon
- Vermont
- Washington
- Wisconsin
- District of Columbia