Justice Department Sues New Mexico and Albuquerque to Block State Immigration Cooperation Laws
Why It Matters
The federal lawsuit puts New Mexico at the center of a growing national conflict over whether states can legally bar their governments and facilities from assisting federal immigration enforcement. The outcome could set legal precedent affecting similar laws in other states and cities.
What Happened
The U.S. Department of Justice filed suit late Friday against the state of New Mexico and the City of Albuquerque, seeking an emergency injunction to halt enforcement of two laws the federal government says obstruct immigration enforcement operations.
The first target is House Bill 9, the “Immigrant Safety Ordinance,” signed by Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham earlier this year. The law bars local governments from cooperating with federal immigration actions and requires local detention facilities to terminate contracts for housing federal immigration detainees.
The lawsuit also challenges Albuquerque’s “Safe Community Places Ordinance,” a local measure that extends the city’s existing non-cooperation policies and requires businesses to designate non-public areas off-limits to ICE agents unless they present a judicial warrant.
Named as defendants are Governor Lujan Grisham, Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller, and both the state and city governments.
What Officials Are Saying
First Assistant U.S. Attorney Ryan Ellison framed the suit as a constitutional matter. “HB9 and the SCPO unlawfully interfere with federal immigration enforcement, illegally discriminate against federal operations, and violate constitutional protections regarding contracts and federal supremacy,” Ellison said.
New Mexico Attorney General Raul Torrez responded within hours, pledging a full legal defense. Torrez argued the law represents a proper exercise of state authority, pointing to documented conditions in immigration detention facilities operating within the state — including deaths in custody and inadequate medical care — as the basis for the legislature’s action.
“Federal agents remain free to enforce federal immigration law,” Torrez said in a statement. “What they may not do is compel New Mexico’s officers, employees, and institutions to administer federal enforcement priorities the state has chosen not to adopt.”
Torrez characterized the federal lawsuit as an attempt to reverse a democratically enacted policy decision through litigation rather than on constitutional grounds.
Not all local officials opposed the federal action. Albuquerque City Councilor Dan Lewis, a Republican, said Mayor Keller “deserves to be sued for doubling down on reckless sanctuary policies that undermine law enforcement agencies and put everyone at risk.”
By the Numbers
- 2 laws targeted: House Bill 9 (state) and the Safe Community Places Ordinance (city)
- 2 defendants named: Governor Lujan Grisham and Mayor Tim Keller, along with the state and city
- HB 9 was signed in February 2026, less than four months before the federal suit was filed
- No hearing date or ruling has been scheduled as of the time of filing
- Attorney General Torrez has successfully litigated multiple prior challenges to federal policy changes affecting New Mexico
Zoom Out
The New Mexico lawsuit is part of a broader federal legal strategy under the current administration to challenge state and local sanctuary policies. Similar confrontations have played out in California, Illinois, and Colorado, where state laws limiting local cooperation with ICE have drawn federal scrutiny and, in some cases, legal action.
The core legal dispute — whether the federal government can compel state and local governments to assist in immigration enforcement — has roots in the anti-commandeering doctrine established in earlier Supreme Court rulings. Courts have generally held that the federal government cannot force states to enforce federal law, but the question of whether states may actively prohibit cooperation remains less settled.
The immigration enforcement tension is one of several ongoing legal and policy conflicts between New Mexico’s state government and Washington. The state has also faced scrutiny over its child welfare system, with officials pushing back against a recent DOJ report while citing reform efforts already underway.
What’s Next
A federal judge must first decide whether to grant the requested injunction before both laws can be fully enforced. If granted, the injunction would temporarily suspend HB 9 and the Safe Community Places Ordinance while the broader case proceeds. Attorney General Torrez has indicated his office will contest the injunction and defend the law on the merits. No hearing date had been set as of Friday’s filing. The case is expected to raise foundational questions about federal supremacy and the scope of state authority over government personnel and facilities — questions that other states with contested immigration enforcement policies will be watching closely.