Case: United States v. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts

1:26-cv-12401 | U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts

Filed Date: May 27, 2026

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This case concerns whether the Supremacy Clause barred Massachusetts from denying confidential license plates to federal immigration agents while continuing to provide them to other law enforcement.  The United States of America filed this complaint on May 27, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts against the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and several state officials sued in their official capacities: Governor Maura Healey, Attorney General Andrea Campbell, Interim S…

This case concerns whether the Supremacy Clause barred Massachusetts from denying confidential license plates to federal immigration agents while continuing to provide them to other law enforcement. 

The United States of America filed this complaint on May 27, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts against the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and several state officials sued in their official capacities: Governor Maura Healey, Attorney General Andrea Campbell, Interim Secretary of Transportation Phillip Eng, and Registrar of Motor Vehicles Colleen Ogilvie. This was not a class action. The complaint alleged that Massachusetts had long operated a confidential license plate program available to numerous law enforcement agencies. Federal participants included the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), the U.S. Marshals Service, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). After President Donald J. Trump took office for the second time in January 2025, however, Massachusetts changed its policy and refused to issue confidential plates to ICE and CBP while continuing to issue them to other agencies. Governor Healey's office justified the change by asserting that ICE was not engaged in "legitimate criminal law enforcement work," and the United States contended this rationale was pretextual, noting that the Commonwealth's own application forms and internal policies drew no civil-versus-criminal distinction for other agencies. The complaint further alleged that the policy endangered federal officers and compromised undercover operations and immigration enforcement. Represented by attorneys from the U.S. Department of Justice's Civil Division and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Massachusetts, the United States asserted two counts under the Supremacy Clause: unlawful discrimination against the federal government and unlawful regulation of the federal government. It sought declaratory relief, a permanent injunction against enforcement of the policy as to ICE and CBP, and costs and fees.

The case was initially assigned to Magistrate Judge Jessica D. Hedges. After the United States declined to consent to proceed before a magistrate judge, the case was reassigned to District Judge William G. Young on June 25, 2026. On June 29, 2026, Attorney General Campbell moved to dismiss the claims against her, arguing that the complaint did not allege she had any role in developing, promulgating, implementing, or enforcing the confidential registration policy, and that it alleged nothing more than that she served as Attorney General. The United States filed no opposition. Judge Young granted the motion on July 20, 2026, dismissing all claims against Campbell for substantially the reasons stated in her motion and, under the district's local rules, because no opposition had been filed. The dismissal reached only Campbell; the claims against the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the remaining officials continued. A companion suit advancing the same confidential-plate theory against another state, United States v. State of Washington, was pending simultaneously.

As of August 2026, the case remained ongoing in the district court against the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and its remaining officials, with service completed on all defendants, no preliminary injunction sought or entered, and no ruling on the merits of the Supremacy Clause claims.

Summary Authors

Trump2.0 Collection (6/7/2026)

Simon Jillson (8/3/2026)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73400637/parties/united-states-v-the-commonwealth-of-massachusetts/


Judge(s)

Young, William G. (Massachusetts)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Faso, Alessandra (Massachusetts)

Attorney for Defendant

Bahal, Tasha J. (Massachusetts)

Fowler, Erin E. (Massachusetts)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Documents in this case
1

1:26-cv-12401

Complaint

The United States of America v. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts et al.

May 27, 2026

May 27, 2026

Complaint
18

1:26-cv-12401

Order

The United States of America v. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts et al.

July 20, 2026

July 20, 2026

Order/Opinion

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73400637/united-states-v-the-commonwealth-of-massachusetts/

Last updated Sept. 23, 2026, 3:23 a.m.

Docket for: United States v. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts
ECF Number Date Description Link
1 May 27, 2026

COMPLAINT against The United States of America, (Fee Status: US Government), filed by The United States of America,. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Civil Cover Sheet, # 5 Category Form)(Faso, Alessandra) (Entered: 05/27/2026)

1 Exhibit A

View on RECAP

2 Exhibit B

View on RECAP

3 Exhibit C

View on RECAP

4 Civil Cover Sheet

View on RECAP

5 Category Form

View on RECAP

Clearinghouse
2 May 28, 2026

NOTICE of Case Assignment. Magistrate Judge Jessica D. Hedges assigned to case. Plaintiff's counsel, or defendant's counsel if this case was initiated by the filing of a Notice of Removal, are required to submit a form indicating whether the parties consent to proceed before a U.S. Magistrate Judge. PROMPT SUBMISSION OF THE COMPLETED FORM IS MANDATORY. The parties are directed to the Notice and Procedures regarding Consent to Proceed before the Magistrate Judge which can be downloaded here. These documents will be mailed to counsel not receiving notice electronically. Pursuant to General Order 26-01, until the Court receives for filing a consent to the Magistrate Judge's jurisdiction, or until a case is reassigned to a District Judge, the initial assignment of a civil case to the Magistrate Judge is a referral to the Magistrate Judge under 28 USC 636(b) for decision on all pretrial non-dispositive matters and for Report and Recommendation on dispositive matters. (MBM) (Entered: 05/28/2026)

RECAP
3 May 28, 2026

Summons Issued as to Andrea Campbell, Phillip Eng, Maura Healey, Colleen Ogilvie, The Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Counsel receiving this notice electronically should download this summons, complete one for each defendant and serve it in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 4 and LR 4.1. Summons will be mailed to plaintiff(s) not receiving notice electronically for completion of service. (EZG) (Entered: 05/28/2026)

RECAP
May 28, 2026

Notice of Case Assignment to a Magistrate Judge

4 June 3, 2026

MOTION of Brandon Michael Hayes for Leave to File Brief as Amicus Curiae in Support of Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, Federal Supremacy, Neutral Administration, and Operational Record Integrity. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Brief, # 2 Text of Proposed Order) (EZG) (Entered: 06/05/2026)

1 Text of Proposed Brief

View on PACER

2 Text of Proposed Order

View on PACER

RECAP
5 June 16, 2026

MOTION for Extension of Time to 30 Days From the Date the Last Defendant is Served to File Answer by Andrea Campbell.(Fowler, Erin) (Entered: 06/16/2026)

RECAP
6 June 17, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance by Erin E. Fowler on behalf of Andrea Campbell (Fowler, Erin) (Entered: 06/17/2026)

RECAP
7 June 17, 2026

Magistrate Judge Jessica D. Hedges: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered regarding MOTION for Extension of Time 5 . Because the United States does not assent to the full extension of time requested in this motion, I will reserve ruling fully on the motion until the United States has the opportunity to file an opposition, pursuant to L.R. 7.1(b)(2). If the United States wishes to file an opposition to this motion, it shall do so on an expedited basis, within seven days of this order. In the meantime, I find good cause, based on the agreement of the parties, to grant the 14-day extension assented to by the United States. See Docket No. 5 at 6. SO ORDERED. (EZG) (Entered: 06/17/2026)

RECAP
8 June 17, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance by Tasha J. Bahal on behalf of Andrea Campbell (Bahal, Tasha) (Entered: 06/17/2026)

RECAP
June 17, 2026

Order

9 June 24, 2026

RESPONSE to Motion re 5 MOTION for Extension of Time to 30 Days From the Date the Last Defendant is Served to File Answer filed by The United States of America. (Faso, Alessandra) (Entered: 06/24/2026)

RECAP
10 June 24, 2026

Refusal to Consent to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge. . (Faso, Alessandra) (Entered: 06/24/2026)

RECAP
11 June 25, 2026

Magistrate Judge Jessica D. Hedges: ELECTRONIC ORDER REASSIGNING CASE entered. (EZG) (Entered: 06/25/2026)

RECAP
12 June 25, 2026

ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. Judge William G. Young assigned to case. If the trial Judge issues an Order of Reference of any matter in this case to a Magistrate Judge, the matter will be transmitted to Magistrate Judge Jessica D. Hedges. (JAM) (Entered: 06/25/2026)

RECAP
13 June 25, 2026

Judge William G. Young: ELECTRONIC ORDER 5 MOTION for Extension of Time to 30 Days From the Date the Last Defendant is Served to File Answer. Motion denied beyond the 14 day extension already granted. ECF No. [ 7 ]. (MAP) (Entered: 06/25/2026)

RECAP
14 June 25, 2026

Judge William G. Young: ELECTRONIC ORDER VACATING 13 Electronic Order. (MAP) (Entered: 06/25/2026)

RECAP
15 June 25, 2026

Judge William G. Young: ELECTRONIC ORDER 5 MOTION for Extension of Time to 30 Days From the Date the Last Defendant is Served to File Answer.Motion denied beyond the 21 days from the date of service in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.Proc. 12(a)(1)(A)(i).(MAP) (Entered: 06/25/2026)

RECAP
June 25, 2026

Order Reassigning Case

June 25, 2026

Notice of Case Assignment

June 25, 2026

Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Answer

June 25, 2026

Order

16 June 29, 2026

MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Andrea Campbell.(Fowler, Erin) (Entered: 06/29/2026)

RECAP
17 June 29, 2026

MEMORANDUM in Support re 16 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by Andrea Campbell. (Fowler, Erin) (Entered: 06/29/2026)

RECAP
18 July 20, 2026

Judge William G. Young: ORDER entered granting 16 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (Sonnenberg, Elizabeth) (Entered: 07/20/2026)

Clearinghouse
19 July 20, 2026

SUMMONS Returned Executed as to Commonwealth of Massachusetts served on 7/13/2026, answer due 8/3/2026. (Faso, Alessandra) Modified on 7/21/2026 to Correct Answer Date as Counsel Entered the Wrong Date of Service for the Defendant and Selected the Wrong Party - Defendant Who Was Served (MAP). (Entered: 07/20/2026)

RECAP
20 July 20, 2026

SUMMONS Returned Executed The Commonwealth of Massachusetts served on 7/13/2026, answer due 8/3/2026. (Faso, Alessandra) Modified on 7/21/2026 to Correct Answer Date as Counsel Entered the Wrong Date of Service for the Defendant (MAP). (Entered: 07/20/2026)

RECAP
21 July 20, 2026

SUMMONS Returned Executed Maura Healey served on 7/13/2026, answer due 8/3/2026. (Faso, Alessandra) Modified on 7/21/2026 to Correct Answer Date as Counsel Entered the Wrong Date of Service for the Defendant (MAP). (Entered: 07/20/2026)

RECAP
22 July 20, 2026

SUMMONS Returned Executed Phillip Eng served on 6/26/2026, answer due 7/17/2026. (Faso, Alessandra) (Entered: 07/20/2026)

RECAP
23 July 20, 2026

SUMMONS Returned Executed Colleen Ogilvie served on 7/1/2026, answer due 7/22/2026. (Faso, Alessandra) (Entered: 07/20/2026)

RECAP
24 July 31, 2026

First MOTION to Dismiss Complaint by Phillip Eng, Maura Healey, Colleen Ogilvie, The Commonwealth of Massachusetts.(Bahal, Tasha) (Entered: 07/31/2026)

RECAP
25 July 31, 2026

MEMORANDUM in Support re 24 First MOTION to Dismiss Complaint filed by Phillip Eng, Maura Healey, Colleen Ogilvie, The Commonwealth of Massachusetts. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2)(Bahal, Tasha) (Entered: 07/31/2026)

1 Exhibit 1

View on PACER

2 Exhibit 2

View on PACER

RECAP
26 Aug. 12, 2026

Assented to MOTION for Extension of Time to August 28, 2026 to File Response/Reply as to 24 First MOTION to Dismiss Complaint, 25 Memorandum in Support of Motion by The United States of America. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Faso, Alessandra) (Entered: 08/12/2026)

RECAP
27 Aug. 12, 2026

Judge William G. Young: ELECTRONIC ORDER allowed 26 Assented to MOTION for Extension of Time to August 28, 2026 to File Response/Reply re 24 First MOTION to Dismiss Complaint. Response due by August 28, 2026. (MAP) (Entered: 08/12/2026)

RECAP
Aug. 12, 2026

Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply

28 Aug. 28, 2026

MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 24 First MOTION to Dismiss Complaint filed by The United States of America. (Faso, Alessandra) (Entered: 08/28/2026)

RECAP
29 Sept. 11, 2026

Leave to File Document

RECAP
31 Sept. 11, 2026

Reply to Response to Motion

RECAP
Sept. 11, 2026

Order on Motion for Leave to File Document

32 Sept. 16, 2026

Notice of Appearance

RECAP
33 Sept. 16, 2026

Withdraw as Attorney

RECAP
Sept. 17, 2026

Order on Motion to Withdraw as Attorney

Sept. 18, 2026

Notice Setting or Resetting Hearing on Motion

Case Details

State / Territory:

Massachusetts

Case Type(s):

Public Benefits/Government Services

Immigration and/or the Border

Special Collection(s):

Trump Administration 2.0: Litigation and Investigations By the Government

Key Dates

Filing Date: May 27, 2026

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Plaintiff is the United States of America, suing to enforce the Supremacy Clause and protect federal immigration-enforcement operations against the Massachusetts confidential-plate policy.

Plaintiff Type(s):

U.S. Dept of Justice plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

U.S. Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

State

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts

Defendant Type(s):

Jurisdiction-wide

Law-enforcement

Facility Type(s):

Government-run

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201

Ex parte Young (federal or state officials)

Constitutional Clause(s):

Supremacy Clause

Other Dockets:

District of Massachusetts 1:26-cv-12401

Available Documents:

Complaint (any)

Trial Court Docket

Outcome

Prevailing Party: None Yet / None

Relief Sought:

Attorneys fees

Declaratory judgment

Injunction

Relief Granted:

None yet

Source of Relief:

None yet

Issues

General/Misc.:

Record-keeping

Immigration/Border:

Enforcement location

Undocumented immigrants - state and local regulation

Recommended Citation