February, 25 2020, 11:00pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Claudia Muñoz, cmunoz@grassrootsleadership.org, 512-910-1759
Daniel Lee and Lauren Wilfong, dtl305@nyu.edu & lmw337@nyu.edu, 413-835-5754 & 413-207-4207
Dave Bennion, david.bennion@freemigrate.org, 646-441-0741
Jen Nessel, jnessel@ccrjustice.org, 212-614-6449
Immigrant Rights Groups Sue ICE for Immediate Release of Information Concerning the Continuing Retaliation Against Immigrants in Sanctuary
Groups File Lawsuit to Hold ICE and DOJ Accountable, Seek Documents and Transparency Regarding Targeting of Sanctuary Seekers and Activists With Excessive, Retaliatory Fines
WASHINGTON
Amid a week of action lead by a collective of immigrants taking sanctuary across the U.S., Austin Sanctuary Network, Free Migration Project, Grassroots Leadership, and the Center for Constitutional Rights filed a lawsuit on Wednesday seeking answers about how the Trump administration decided to target sanctuary leaders with six-figure fines.
In the summer of 2019, a number of high-profile activists in sanctuary--all women who fled persecution in their countries of origin--were notified of ICE's intent to seek hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines from each of them. These notices were abruptly withdrawn, only to be re-issued several months later. The FOIA sought documents concerning this unprecedented spate of civil fines against people who have chosen to take sanctuary while pursuing their legal remedies to remain in the U.S.
"It is so painful to have to continue to endure attacks from ICE when all I want is to be free. These fines couldn't have been anything other than retaliation for the love and support that I have received from my community here in Austin, TX," said Hilda Ramirez, an activist and leader of Austin Sanctuary Network who has lived in sanctuary in an Austin, Texas church since 2016. "Behind closed doors, ICE officials have admitted they are targeting me for political reasons, but then they deny it publicly. It is time that ICE tells us exactly why they are targeting me and other women who are in sanctuary," continued Ramirez. Ramirez was one of a handful of sanctuary leaders who received such an "intent to fine" notice in 2019.
Edith Espinal Moreno, an immigration activist and sanctuary seeker in Ohio, also received such a notice. "It was surprising and upsetting when I received the letter from ICE threatening to fine me. I know they are trying to scare me and other people in sanctuary, but I won't give up. My faith in God and the support of the community gives me strength to do everything I can to keep my family together," said Espinal Moreno.
The federal lawsuit was filed this morning against the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency (ICE), the U.S. Department of the Treasury (DOT), and the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) in the Southern District of New York. The three agencies have failed to produce virtually any documents to the requestors, who filed their FOIA request in September 2019.
Urging transparency and accountability, Claudia Munoz, Interim Executive Co-Director of Grassroots Leadership, stated: "ICE continues to act in a way that makes them seem as though they are not accountable. But as government employees they are in fact accountable, not only to elected officials, but to the public and the courts as well. ICE has made troubling decisions by targeting people for political reasons, and we have every reason to believe the decision to impose costly fines against sanctuary leaders is no different. If they have nothing to hide, they should release any and all communication they had regarding the fines."
"These fines are part of the Trump administration's ongoing campaign to target, punish, and vilify our nation's immigrants and immigrants' rights advocates. From describing sanctuary cities as 'catastrophic' and 'dangerous' to deploying Customs and Border Protection SWAT-like personnel and withholding federal funds from sanctuary jurisdictions, these fines only serve to retaliate against courageous sanctuary leaders who have dared to advocate for just and humane immigration policies," said Lupe Aguirre, Bertha Justice Fellow at the Center for Constitutional Rights.
The groups argue that access to these documents is vital because of the retaliatory nature of the fines. "These actions by the U.S. government, and their subsequent lack of transparency, raise serious constitutional concerns about government retaliation for freedom of speech and the imposition of excessive and punitive fines," said Daniel Lee of the NYU Law Immigrant Rights Clinic. "They are part and parcel of the Trump administration's attempts to punish sanctuary leaders and sanctuary jurisdictions," added Lauren Wilfong of the NYU Law Immigrant Rights Clinic.
These fines have alarmed immigrant rights activists, media organizations, and Congressional Representatives--sparking vigils, protests, and the introduction of private bills in Congress in support of the women who were fined.
"The egregious fines ICE issued against women in sanctuary show the lengths to which ICE will go to retaliate against immigrant leaders who speak out against family separation and unjust deportation policies. The fact that ICE then rescinded the fines reflects the power of the community that supports these sanctuary leaders. However, the sanctuary leaders need support from our elected officials in Congress because ICE is threatening to renew the fines," said David Bennion, Executive Director of Free Migration Project.
As part of a week of action organized by sanctuary and faith leaders, the groups held a press conference on Wednesday, February 26, announcing the filing of the lawsuit and other efforts to investigate this disturbing new pattern of retaliation.
To learn more about the case and read today's filing, visit the Center for Constitutional Rights case page.
For more information about the requesting organizations, please visit:
https://austinsanctuarynetwork.org
https://freemigrationproject.org
https://grassrootsleadership.org
https://ccrjustice.org
The Center for Constitutional Rights is dedicated to advancing and protecting the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. CCR is committed to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change.
(212) 614-6464LATEST NEWS
'Stupid, Costly and Deadly': Trump Spent At Least $11 Billion Paying Government Workers Not to Work
"Donald Trump has often spoken about... making the government more efficient. Yet his massive federal layoffs and resignation programs have been the epitome of inefficiency."
Jun 24, 2026
A report released by government watchdog Public Citizen on Wednesday estimates that the federal government has blown billions of dollars paying former federal workers to not do their jobs.
According to Public Citizen, nearly 140,000 members of the federal workforce have taken part in the Trump administration's Deferred Resignation Program (DRP), which in turn has paid them at least $11 billion in exchange for not working.
Citing data from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), the report calculates that "paying federal employees in the DRP not to work cost between $11.1 billion and $15.1 billion through March 2026," which would be enough money to pay for 3.6 billion school lunches, a full year of daycare for more than 837,000 children, or the combined annual salaries of 149,000 public school teachers.
The report finds that "the costs of paying federal workers not to work" will only rise over the next year.
"Since the beginning of 2026, several agencies have offered new rounds of the Deferred Resignation Program permitting federal employees to stop working, but to stay on the federal payroll through September 2026," the report states, "adding even more to the burgeoning financial cost of this billion-dollar resignation program."
The report emphasizes that there will be additional "massive costs on society" that will come from having a gutted federal workforce that aren't captured by its $11 billion estimate.
One obvious area where staff losses will cost the government money will be in lower tax collection, given that staffing at the Internal Revenue Services (IRS) fell by 25% over a four-month period last year.
"The Budget Lab at Yale University estimated that a 22% reduction in IRS staffing levels would result in a $197.7 billion loss over a 10-year period," the report notes, "the overwhelming majority of which will come from top earners who will escape paying what they owe."
Other critical government departments to see significant staff losses thanks to the DRP include the Department of Defense, which has lost 48,000 workers; the Department of Treasury, which has 23,000 fewer workers; and the Department of Agriculture, with a loss of more than 14,000 employees.
"Donald Trump has often spoken about cutting waste and making the government more efficient," the report concludes. "Yet his massive federal layoffs and resignation programs have been the epitome of inefficiency and have resulted in billions of dollars in wasted federal funds."
Douglas Pasternak, Public Citizen researcher and author of the report, said that "the Trump administration’s efforts to shrink the federal government have been stupid, costly and deadly," and pointed to other negative impacts of the layoffs in addition to the costs of paying people to not work.
"Multiple agencies had to rehire those who took part in this program because Trump officials realized how vital they were to managing critical national programs," Pasternak said. "Even worse is the work left undone by the coerced departure of these workers, costing billions of dollars and putting untold numbers of lives at risk as the federal government fails to perform crucial functions."
Keep ReadingShow Less
On Dobbs Anniversary, Graham Platner Highlights ‘Stirring Defense’ of Kavanaugh by Susan Collins
With the Supreme Court's overturning of abortion rights just as unpopular as it was four years ago, Democrats are hoping to highlight the "toxic, anti-choice records" of their GOP opponents.
Jun 24, 2026
Fresh off an endorsement from the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, Democratic Senate candidate Graham Platner is continuing to hammer his Republican opponent, Sen. Susan Collins, over her vote to confirm US Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, which helped set the stage for the right-wing court to overturn the constitutional right to an abortion in 2022.
Platner marked the four-year anniversary of the court's ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization on Wednesday by posting a video of Collins (Maine) from 2018, standing before the Senate and giving what he called a "stirring defense" of Kavanaugh, whose nomination by President Donald Trump was at risk of being derailed by accusations of sexual assault from three women that had been aired during his confirmation hearing.
Collins, who'd go on to serve as a deciding vote to confirm Kavanaugh to the high court, described the then-federal judge as "an exemplary public servant" whom she'd hoped would "work to lessen the divisions in the Supreme Court, so that we have far fewer 5-4 decisions."
Around that time, she said she'd been assured that Kavanaugh viewed Roe v. Wade, which guaranteed the right to abortion before fetal viability, as established precedent that he would keep in place if confirmed.
Of course, Dobbs itself ended up being a 5-4 decision, with Kavanaugh being one of the five conservatives who voted to hand decision-making on reproductive autonomy back to the states. (The court also voted 6-3 to uphold the 15-week Mississippi abortion ban at the center of the case.)
Since the ruling, 13 states have almost or totally outlawed abortion, while seven more have restricted it to between 6 and 12 weeks of gestation, according to KFF. States with bans have seen increases in both infant and maternal deaths, and delays to emergency and miscarriage care from providers unsure if they are putting themselves at legal risk.
As Collins has run for her sixth term in the Senate, her pivotal vote for Kavanaugh has come back to haunt her. While Collins said in 2022 that she had been "misled" by Kavanaugh about his stance on Roe, she has insisted this month that she did not "regret" voting to confirm him.
She has, however, appeared eager to downplay the impact of her decision. On Monday, she falsely stated that, "Whether Justice Kavanaugh were confirmed or not, Roe v. Wade would have been overturned, given the 6-3 vote.”
In fact, the vote to fully overturn Roe was 5-4, as Chief Justice John Roberts did not join his fellow conservatives in ending the precedent, leading Platner to accuse her of "lying through her teeth."
While abortion does not rank high on the list of issues Americans say will determine their vote, the Dobbs decision is just as despised—if not slightly more so—compared with four years ago, when it helped to fuel an unexpectedly strong Democratic showing in the 2022 midterms.
According to a nationwide poll from Marquette University this May, 61% of Americans still said they disapproved of the decision to overturn Roe, compared with 58% who said the same thing in June 2022 shortly after the draft of the Dobbs decision was leaked.
As the second Trump administration turbocharges attacks on reproductive rights, pro-choice groups are hoping to make Collins pay for her role in midwifing this new reality and have thrown their full weight behind Platner, who has said he'd fight "tooth-and-nail to restore and protect reproductive freedom."
"Mainers deserve a senator they can trust to have their backs at every turn. It is clear that it is not Susan Collins,” said Planned Parenthood Action Fund president and CEO Alexis McGill Johnson in a statement endorsing Platner on Monday. "We know we can count on Graham Platner to fight for everyone to get the essential, lifesaving care they need as part of a pro-reproductive rights Senate majority."
Maeve Coyle, a spokesperson for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC), said the party is seeking to highlight its Republican opponents' "toxic, anti-choice records" at the national level in the hope that "the American people will vote against Republicans who paved the way for Roe’s demise and cheered on the rollback of our rights.”
A press release sent by the DSCC on Wednesday highlights the voting records of other top GOP midterm targets, including Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska), who signed an amicus brief in support of overturning Roe and has said he opposes abortion even in cases of rape or incest or to protect a mother's life. It also called out Reps. Mike Collins (R-Ga.) and Ashley Hinson (R-Iowa), who co-sponsored total national abortion bans that would have also outlawed in vitro fertilization (IVF).
The Maine Democratic Party, meanwhile, has zeroed in on Susan Collins' vote for Kavanaugh with a new digital ad and a series of prominent newspaper ads that draw a direct line between her decision and the slew of abortion bans that followed.
“Susan Collins wants Mainers to forget what happened after she cast the decisive vote for Brett Kavanaugh. But Mainers haven’t forgotten," said Kristi Johnston, a spokesperson for the Maine Democratic Party.
"Four years after Dobbs, Collins continues to defend that vote while rubber-stamping more anti-abortion judges onto the federal bench," she added. "Mainers deserve to know exactly what role Susan Collins continues to play in stripping away reproductive freedom.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Unconscionable': Outrage as GOP Farm Bill Omits Plan to Delay Looming Food Aid Disaster
"The harm unfolding across the country is already far greater than many anticipated," warned one expert.
Jun 24, 2026
Senate Republicans unveiled annual farm legislation this week that would do nothing to address the worsening nationwide hunger crisis spurred by President Donald Trump and the GOP's unprecedented assault on federal food aid.
The draft bill introduced Tuesday by Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.), the chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, omits a Democratic proposal to delay a provision of the 2025 Republican budget law that will require states to pay a share of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits for the first time in the program's history, while also increasing states' share of administrative costs. State leaders have warned of massive budgetary impacts that could result in even deeper cuts to food aid—and potentially force states to withdraw from the SNAP program entirely.
Ty Jones Cox, vice president for food assistance at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), said it was "unconscionable" for Republicans to do nothing in the face of large-scale loss of food aid—including among children—and a looming budgetary disaster for states across the country.
"The harm unfolding across the country is already far greater than many anticipated, with more than 4 million people losing SNAP through March," Cox said in a statement Tuesday. "Even more people will lose the vital food assistance they need to afford groceries unless Congress immediately delays HR 1’s unprecedented shift of significant new SNAP costs to states."
Without congressional action, the SNAP cost-shifting provision of the Republican budget law will take effect on October 1, 2027. Survey data released this month shows that nearly 30% of US state governments believe they could be forced to narrow SNAP eligibility to cope with the new costs, which are expected to average $218 million per state. Eleven percent of states "identified withdrawing from SNAP as a potential risk," according to the poll conducted by the American Public Human Services Association.
It really seems like it should be a bigger deal that 11% of states who responded to this survey identified *withdrawing from SNAP entirely* as a potential risk of the massive cost shift that's about to hit state budgets thanks to H.R. 1. https://t.co/RbsY9LNdLv pic.twitter.com/TKOQIIK0ci
— Katie Bergh (@Katie_Bergh) June 23, 2026
Crystal FitzSimons, president of the Food Research & Action Center, said Tuesday that the Republican farm bill "ignores the needs of tens of millions of people, including families with children, older adults, people with disabilities, and veterans, who are finding it increasingly difficult to put food on the table."
"By shifting program costs to states, expanding time limits, and putting a cap on future benefit adjustments, HR 1 has undermined SNAP, the stability of families, communities, and local economies, and weakened state budgets," FitzSimons warned. "The SNAP benefit cost shift to states and increase in states’ administrative costs will force states to make impossible choices: reduce education funding, delay infrastructure investments, cut public health programs, constrain Medicaid spending, raise taxes, or reduce access to SNAP itself."
Senate Republicans unveiled their farm legislation amid a growing hunger and affordability crisis that experts say is directly attributable to Trump-GOP policies, from blanket tariffs to the war on Iran to SNAP cuts that the new bill—like the House version—does nothing to reverse.
Survey data released Tuesday by the No Kid Hungry campaign found that 55% of low-income families with children have had to cut back on groceries recently to make ends meet. The poll also found that 90% of families surveyed reported that they "would have to cut back significantly on food" if they lost SNAP benefits.
"Rising prices are making it harder for families to afford basic necessities," George Kelemen, senior vice president of the No Kid Hungry campaign, said in a statement. "That’s why SNAP’s grocery benefit, which helps feed about 40 million Americans including nearly 16 million children, is a vital support for helping them put food on the table."
"This SNAP crisis is too dangerous to ignore," Kelemen added. "Reasonable steps must be included in this farm bill to delay the cost-sharing until states have the time they need to implement all the complex changes handed to them."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular