United States v. County of Washtenaw

147 local governments push back against federal anti-immigration push and defend local policies in Michigan

A coalition of 147 cities, counties, and elected officials is pushing back against the Trump administration’s efforts to compel Washtenaw County, Michigan, to enforce its harmful immigration policies. On the coalition’s behalf, Public Rights Project filed an amicus brief, arguing the county’s policies are good for their communities.

The brief was filed in a case brought by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), which aims to force Washtenaw County, along with its sheriff and prosecutor, to abandon their so-called “sanctuary policies” and engage in federal immigration enforcement. The coalition filed the brief in support of Washtenaw County’s motion to dismiss the case.

The brief explains that the U.S. Constitution gives local governments the authority to make decisions about their communities’ police resources. It also highlights the real benefits of sanctuary policies.

• They make communities safer by building trust between law enforcement and all residents, so people will report crimes and cooperate with police.
• They strengthen local economies because immigrants play a vital role in the workforce across many industries.
• They support public health by ensuring people can access medical care without fear, protecting community well-being.

In similar challenges, PRP is representing Albuquerque and Boston. We’ve also filed briefs in support of Illinois, Cook County, Chicago, Minneapolis, New York City, four New Jersey cities, and Rochester, New York.

Read the amicus brief.

Update:

On August 21, 2026, the district court dismissed the Trump administration’s case against Washtenaw County. The court found that the federal government failed to show the county did anything beyond exercising its authority under the 10th Amendment. This means the federal government can’t compel the county to enforce federal immigration law. 

The court’s decision discusses our amicus brief at length, citing it for arguments about how declining to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement benefits communities, including their economies and their safety.  

Read the decision.