Federal Judge Reprimands Trump Administration Over Immigration Enforcement Conditions

Wed Oct 15 2025 01:18:08 GMT+0300 (Eastern European Summer Time)

In a ruling that challenges the Trump Administration's practices, a federal judge in Rhode Island declared the imposition of immigration enforcement conditions on disaster funding unconstitutional, accusing the administration of coercing states into compliance.

U.S. District Judge William Smith ruled that the Department of Homeland Security cannot enforce immigration conditions on disaster funding, criticizing such actions as unconstitutional. This decision followed a lawsuit by 20 state attorneys general who claimed the government was bullying states into hiring for immigration enforcement in exchange for critical disaster funding.

A federal judge in Rhode Island on Tuesday accused the Trump administration of trying to “bully” states into accepting conditions requiring them to cooperate on immigration enforcement actions to secure disaster funding after he had previously ruled those actions unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge William Smith, appointed by former Republican President George W. Bush, issued a summary judgment last month stating that the Department of Homeland Security could not impose these conditions.

Despite the September ruling, a coalition of 20 state Democratic attorneys general argued that the agency continued to attach the conditions to funding grants, suggesting that such demands would apply if the ruling were “stayed, vacated, or extinguished.”

Judge Smith ordered Homeland Security to cease enforcement of these conditions against the plaintiff states and required amendments to be made to grant documents within seven days, stripping away any language related to compliance with federal immigration laws.

“Defendants’ new condition is not a good faith effort to comply with the order,” Smith remarked. “It is a ham-handed attempt to bully the states into making promises they have no obligation to make at the risk of losing critical disaster and other funding already appropriated by Congress.”

The states' complaint highlighted their reliance on federal funds for disaster preparation and response, arguing that immigration enforcement conditions jeopardized funding for vital resources needed to address emergencies like earthquakes and wildfires.

The Department of Homeland Security was accused of attempting to disrupt the emergency management system, using funding as leverage to force states to dedicate law enforcement resources to federal immigration tasks. The judge agreed that this was not only unconstitutional but also in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act.

While the government sought to downplay the issue, deeming it moot due to the exclusion of certain programs from compliance, it maintained that it prioritized lawful enforcement and warned states in light of potential appeals.