The Department of Justice has sued Maryland, arguing that the state’s sanctuary measures and Senate Bill 791 unlawfully block federal immigration enforcement and violate the Supremacy Clause.
The Justice Department filed a 33-page lawsuit naming the state of Maryland and Attorney General Anthony Brown, saying the state enacted Senate Bill 791 to interfere with federal immigration operations. The complaint asserts the bill was designed to “obstruct federal law enforcement and thwart the constitutional obligation of the President of the United States to take care that the immigration laws enacted by Congress are enforced.” The suit asks a court to stop Maryland from putting the law into effect while the legal challenge proceeds.
In its filings the DOJ argues that Maryland’s policies have already hampered federal efforts and caused real operational impacts for immigration officers. Facilities in the state allegedly declined to facilitate transfers of individuals to federal custody even when presented with a routine detainer, the complaint says. The lawsuit frames those refusals as part of a broader refusal to cooperate with federal authorities.
Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward issued a forceful statement alongside the filing, stressing the federal role. “Federal immigration officers merely enforce the laws that our Nation’s elected representatives in Congress passed, reflecting the will of We the People,” said Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward. “When sanctuary jurisdictions enact laws to shield illegal aliens from federal law enforcement, it is not merely federal law that is violated, but the voices of everyday American voters silenced. Today’s suit proves that this Department will never stand for such lawless action from blue state leaders.”
The complaint contends Maryland’s sanctuary policies are unlawful under federal law and that state statutes cannot override federal enforcement priorities. DOJ lawyers point to the Supremacy Clause as the constitutional basis to preempt state measures that obstruct federal officials. The suit emphasizes public safety risks, arguing that local obstruction leaves federal officers unable to do their jobs and vulnerable communities exposed.
Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate reiterated the Justice Department’s position in sharp terms about the consequences of sanctuary rules. “The American people are ultimately the ones who suffer when states pass these irresponsible sanctuary policies,” said Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “The Department of Justice will always defend the Constitution and the rule of law, and it does so today by challenging Maryland’s efforts to thwart federal immigration enforcement.”
https://x.com/TheJusticeDept/status/2075332150149234852
The suit points to specific examples in which Maryland-based facilities would not cooperate with federal detainers, and it documents how those refusals impeded immigration enforcement. The complaint includes exhibits and references to instances the DOJ says demonstrate the law’s disruptive effects on federal operations. Among the materials noted is a document labeled 1_2026.07.09_complaint by scott.mcclallen related to the filing.
Acting Attorney General Blanche directed the Civil Division to identify state and local laws, policies, and practices that interfere with federal duties and lawful operations, and this action is part of that effort. The Maryland case is described as the latest entry in a series of about 20 lawsuits the Civil Division has brought challenging similar policies across the country. Those earlier actions targeted rules and ordinances in jurisdictions including Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, and New York, underscoring a sustained enforcement push from the department.
The complaint asks the court to declare that Maryland may not block or restrict cooperation with federal immigration officials and seeks injunctive relief to prevent the state from enforcing measures that would impede federal officers. By framing the dispute around constitutional preemption and public safety, the DOJ is pressing for a legal ruling that would reaffirm federal primacy on immigration matters. The litigation now moves to the courts, where judges will weigh the balance between state policy choices and federal authority.
