Filed Date: Nov. 12, 2025
Case Ongoing
Clearinghouse coding complete
This case is about a challenge to the Trump administration’s attempt to attach funding conditions to a law enforcement grant program.
On November 12, 2025, the cities of Chicago, Illinois and Saint Paul, Minnesota sued the Department of Justice and Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) over funding conditions the DOJ attempted to attach to COPS grants. COPS grants are provided to states and local governments to improve cooperation between law enforcement agencies and the communities they serve. The grants may be used to hire and train law enforcement officers for community-oriented policing and to establish programs to assist law enforcement officers with mental health, behavioral, and substance abuse issues. In March 2025, Congress allocated $417 million to the COPS Office, and in 2024 Chicago received $6.25 million in COPS grants for their community policing efforts and Saint Paul received $350,000 in 2023 to pay for education and equipment requirements for aspiring police officers and to pay overtime for the officers who mentored these candidates.
In October 2025, the DOJ approved COPS grants for both plaintiff cities, with Chicago’s going towards the salaries of 50 officers, and Saint Paul’s towards their “Downtown Homelessness Initiative.” The awards inserted three conditions that plaintiffs allege are unlawful. The first condition requires the cities comply with 8 U.S.C. §1373, which requires that state and local governments provide information regarding citizenship/immigration status to the Department of Homeland Security upon request (“Immigration Condition”). The second condition requires the cities to “certify that it does not operate any program (including any such programs having components relating to diversity, equity, and inclusion) that violates any applicable Federal civil rights or antidiscrimination laws” (“Discrimination Condition”). The third condition requires the cities to “comply with all applicable federal laws and Presidential Memoranda and all Executive Orders by the President” (“Executive Order Condition”).
The cities argue these conditions are unlawful because: (1) they violate the doctrine of Separation of Powers because only Congress can attach conditions to federal funds, not the president/executive branch; (2) the conditions are not within the authority Congress delegated to the DOJ under the COPS statute; (3) the conditions are unconstitutional under the Spending Clause because they are retroactive conditions and because they are not reasonably related to the purpose of the COPS grants; (4) DOJ violated the Administrative Procedure Act because the conditions are unconstitutional and contrary to statutory law as mentioned above, and because the DOJ provided no reasoned explanation for its decision to impose the funding conditions. Further, the cities alleged that the Immigration Condition violates the 10th Amendment. Both cities have adopted laws that prevent city employees from participating in federal civil immigration enforcement operations, and they argue that the Immigration Condition unconstitutionally intrudes on their authority to enact locally-preferred laws, and turns city employees into arms of the federal government. For similar reasons, plaintiffs also seek a declaratory judgment that 8 U.S.C. §1373 is unconstitutional under the 10th Amendment.
On November 17, 2025, the plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction.
This case was assigned to Judge Jorge L. Alonso and Magistrate Judge Keri L. Holleb. This case is ongoing.
Summary Authors
Bryan Waugh (11/30/2025)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71901645/parties/city-of-chicago-v-department-of-justice/
Alonso, Jorge Luis (Illinois)
Hirsch, Rebecca Alfert (Illinois)
Kane, Stephen J (Illinois)
McElveen, Kelsey J (Illinois)
Johnson, Patrick Walter (Illinois)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71901645/city-of-chicago-v-department-of-justice/
Last updated Dec. 8, 2025, 12:35 a.m.
State / Territory:
Case Type(s):
Special Collection(s):
Trump Administration 2.0: Challenges to the Government
Key Dates
Filing Date: Nov. 12, 2025
Case Ongoing: Yes
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
Cities of Saint Paul, Minnesota and Chicago, Illinois
Plaintiff Type(s):
Public Interest Lawyer: No
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Department of Justice (- United States (national) -), Federal
Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (- United States (national) -), Federal
Defendant Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq.
Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Constitutional Clause(s):
Federalism (including 10th Amendment)
Spending/Appropriations Clauses
Other Dockets:
Northern District of Illinois 1:25-cv-13863
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: None Yet / None
Relief Sought:
Relief Granted:
Source of Relief:
Issues
General/Misc.:
Immigration/Border:
Presidential/Gubernatorial Authority: