And here we go again: the blue-state brigade has thrown another legal tantrum. This time, 21 Democrat-led states (plus our ever-reliable virtue signaler, D.C.) are suing the Trump administration because—gasp—the Justice Department dared to suggest that if you want federal money meant for crime victims, maybe don’t harbor illegal aliens.
Yes, you read that right. The Biden-era “sanctuary” policies are still haunting us like a bad hangover, and now the Trump administration is trying to put the brakes on the madness. The simple ask? If you want your slice of the $1 billion Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) pie, maybe don’t actively obstruct federal immigration enforcement. Sounds reasonable, right? Not to the Democrats.
According to their lawsuit, filed in Rhode Island of all places (because nothing says “justice” like a courtroom in a state that’s basically a sanctuary city with a coastline), these states are outraged—outraged!—that the Justice Department wants to make sure VOCA funds aren’t going to jurisdictions that shield criminal aliens from ICE.
Let’s be clear: we’re not talking about denying services to crime victims. We’re talking about denying cash to states that refuse to cooperate with federal law enforcement. But apparently, asking Democrats to follow federal law is now considered “cruel” and “illegal.” That’s the word from Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell, who paints the Trump administration as some kind of mustache-twirling villain for suggesting that states shouldn’t use federal money while simultaneously flipping off federal law.
And just like that, the lawsuit parade begins. California, New York, Illinois—basically the usual suspects—lined up like it’s open mic night at the Resistance Café. Their argument? That the new rules are “coercive” and somehow “unconstitutional,” because apparently tying funding to policy compliance is only okay when Democrats do it (looking at you, COVID-era education money tied to woke indoctrination).
Let’s not pretend this is about protecting victims. VOCA was created under Reagan to help crime victims—funeral costs, shelters, trauma counseling, the works. But somewhere along the way, Democrats decided the real victims are the ones who crossed the border illegally and then got caught committing another crime. So when the Trump administration says, “Hey, maybe let ICE know when you’re releasing someone with a detainer,” the Democrats cry foul like they just discovered due process.
Their lawsuit accuses the DOJ of being “arbitrary and capricious.” That’s lawyer-speak for “we don’t like this but can’t find a real law it breaks.” They claim it violates the Spending Clause—a favorite fallback for states that want the money but not the rules. Sorry, folks, but if you’re taking Uncle Sam’s cash, you don’t get to write your own terms. That’s not how this works.
Meanwhile, Attorney General Pam Bondi isn’t having any of it. She’s been publishing a list of sanctuary jurisdictions like a naughty list before Christmas, complete with promises of litigation for any state still playing hide-and-seek with ICE. Her message is crystal clear: if you want federal money, don’t act like your state constitution overrules the U.S. Constitution. And if that’s too much to handle, you’re welcome to pass the hat around Portland.
Let’s not kid ourselves. This lawsuit isn’t about protecting victims. It’s about protecting the Democrat narrative that immigration enforcement is inherently evil. It’s the same tired playbook: scream “racism,” sue the federal government, and hope a friendly Obama-appointed judge will block the policy long enough to fund their next reelection campaign.
The Trump administration, for its part, is doing what it does best—forcing the conversation back to common sense. You want federal crime victim funds? Great. Don’t use them to bankroll your sanctuary city fantasy. And if that hurts your feelings, maybe rethink your priorities.
So now we wait for the court drama to play out, while Democrat attorneys general get to preen for the cameras and pretend they’re standing up for the little guy. But let’s be honest: the only thing they’re standing up for is their own political agenda—and it’s wearing a “No ICE” T-shirt.