The U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey has dismissed the Department of Justice’s lawsuit against New Jersey and Governor Sherrill challenging Executive Order 12, which prohibits federal civil immigration officers from accessing nonpublic areas of state-owned or state-controlled property without a judicial warrant or judicial order, and bars the use of state property as a staging, processing, or operational base for civil immigration enforcement.
What changed
Judge Georgette Castner disagreed with DOJ’s arguments that the executive order prevents federal immigration law enforcement, stating instead that it “declares that New Jersey will not provide its own resources to assist the United States in these efforts,” and dismissed the DOJ’s claim that compliance with federal immigration law would be “impossible”.
The Trump DOJ had sued, arguing the policy was preempted by federal immigration law and unconstitutionally discriminated against and regulated the federal government, but U.S. District Judge Georgette Castner rejected every claim.
The executive order, signed in February, was issued in response to escalating violent immigration enforcement tactics by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The order bars state executive branch employees from letting federal immigration officers into nonpublic areas of state buildings, including courthouses, to carry out civil immigration enforcement, unless agents have a judicial warrant, and does not restrict ICE from operating in public areas or on federal, county, or municipal property.
Why it matters
This ruling affirms that New Jersey retains sovereign authority over state property and resources. For immigration practitioners representing clients in New Jersey, the decision establishes that:
- Courthouse protections stand: ICE cannot enter nonpublic areas of state courthouses or other state buildings without a judicial warrant, reducing the risk that your clients will be apprehended at sensitive locations while seeking legal remedies or accessing state services.
- The Supremacy Clause does not mandate state assistance: Federal immigration law does not preempt a state’s decision to withhold its own property and resources from federal enforcement operations.
- No blanket federal override: The federal government cannot force states to facilitate immigration enforcement by simply invoking preemption.
If you represent undocumented immigrants or asylum seekers in New Jersey, this decision protects their access to state facilities, including courthouses, and may reduce ICE enforcement risk at those locations.
Way forward
- Educate clients: Advise clients that New Jersey state property (including courthouses and state buildings) offers greater protection from ICE enforcement absent a judicial warrant. However, make clear that federal and local property are not covered by this protection.
- Cite the ruling: If ICE attempts to access nonpublic areas of New Jersey state property for civil enforcement purposes without a judicial warrant, cite this district court ruling to challenge the intrusion.
- Verify warrant status: When ICE appears at state facilities, request to see a judicial warrant or judicial order. Administrative warrants (ICE-issued) do not satisfy New Jersey’s requirement.
- Watch for appeals: The DOJ may appeal Judge Castner’s decision. Monitor the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit docket for any notice of appeal and adjust client advice accordingly if the ruling is stayed pending appeal.
Disclaimer
This article is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Fola Editorial is not a law firm. Immigration policy and court precedent can change without notice. Verify all information against the primary source linked above and consult a licensed immigration attorney licensed in your jurisdiction before making case strategy decisions.