New Haven Joins Legal Services Group To Defend Immigration Rule From Trump-Texas Effort: Mayor

From the Office of New Haven Mayor Justin Elicker:

Mayor Justin Elicker announced the City of New Haven joined the cities of Baltimore and Columbus alongside Centro Legal de la Raza, in filing an emergency motion to intervene in Texas v. U.S. Department of Justice. The motion seeks to defend an immigration practice after the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) declined to defend it and instead colluded with the State of Texas to invalidate it through a consent judgment entered the same day the lawsuit was filed. The motion to intervene was filed on August 7th in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

Subscribe

The challenged regulation governs administrative closure, a longstanding case-management tool that allows immigration judges and the DOJ Bureau of Immigration Appeals to temporarily pause certain removal proceedings for individuals already lawfully pursuing immigration relief with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). These proceedings often involve immigrants seeking U visas or T visas, and children who a court has found to be abused or neglected and in need of Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS). The rule permits immigration judges to pause less serious cases to devote their limited resources to more serious ones.

As USCIS notes, U nonimmigrant status visas or "U visas" are "set aside for victims of certain crimes who have suffered mental or physical abuse and are helpful to law enforcement or government officials in the investigation or prosecution of criminal activity." T nonimmigrant status visas or "T visas" are set aside for victims of human trafficking. Immigrant children seeking Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) are first found to have been abused or neglected.

The rule helps immigration courts manage increasingly crowded dockets, protects due process, supports public safety by allowing victims and witnesses of crime to continue cooperating with law enforcement while seeking immigration relief, and enables local governments and legal services organizations to serve their communities more effectively.

The City of New Haven and other moving intervenors argue that DOJ and Texas colluded to eliminate administrative closure without the adversarial process required in federal court or the notice and comment procedures required by the Administrative Procedure Act. They are asking the court to allow them to defend the rule and appeal the consent judgment because the decision directly harms local governments, immigrant communities, and legal services providers nationwide.

"We should all be united in wanting everyone to be safe from harm in our communities and be afforded due process in our courts. The administrative closure rule is critical to protecting individuals who have been victims of violent crimes, human trafficking, and abuse, and cooperating with local law enforcement to help bring people to justice," said New Haven Mayor Justin Elicker. "The US DOJ's actions defy common sense, make our communities less safe, and are another example of President Trump's cruel and inhumane policies that are harming New Haven residents and communities across the country."

In 2025, the New Haven Police Department certified eligibility for 36 U visas. In 2026, to date, the police department has certified eligibility for 29 U visas. The local police department where the crime occurs is responsible for certifying the facts and circumstances surrounding the crime, and USCIS ultimately determines whether an individual is eligible for and is granted a U visa. T visas and trafficking investigations are generally handled and prosecuted at the federal level.

"This DOJ action undermines the safety of our communities," said Baltimore Mayor Brandon M. Scott. "The U visa program is a necessary tool that protects Baltimore residents who have witnessed a crime or been the victim of a crime from deportation. It provides these brave individuals with the opportunity to work, pay taxes, and live in our communities, while also supporting the critical work of our law enforcement partners."

"Allowing judges the discretion to manage their immigration dockets better protects due process, allows crime victims and witnesses to cooperate with law enforcement, and defends the dignity and rights of those who follow the rules as they work within the legal system to make a better life for themselves in America," said Columbus City Attorney Zach Klein. "That's why we're intervening in this case and pushing to defend this long-held, commonsense approach to immigration cases."

"Hundreds of our clients are eligible for lawful immigration status—as neglected and abused children, minors seeking asylum, and victims of violent crime in the U.S.—but the Trump administration is pushing these vulnerable individuals toward deportation instead of working with Congress to address severe immigration backlogs, forcing attorneys to defend them with inadequate resources," said Centro Legal de la Raza Immigrants' Rights' Directing Attorney Abby Sullivan Engen. "We are intervening to stop this unlawful attempt to weaponize the immigration courts against our clients."

The City of New Haven and other proposed intervenors are represented by Democracy Forward and Lynn Pinker Hurst & Schwegmann LLP.

"The Trump-Vance administration cannot simply set aside duly promulgated regulations by declining to defend them in court and entering collusive settlement agreements without giving affected communities an opportunity to be heard," said Simon Brewer, Counsel at Democracy Forward. "When agencies abandon the legal processes Congress established for changing regulations, they undermine the fundamental principles of transparency, accountability, and fairness that our democracy depends on. Our clients are fighting to ensure the courts hear from the communities who will face the real-world consequences of this unprecedented effort to sidestep both judicial review and the rulemaking process."

The intervenors seek to appeal the district court's consent judgment, arguing that the litigation lacked the genuine adversity required by law, violated the Administrative Procedure Act's rulemaking requirements, and vacated a federal regulation affecting communities across the country without allowing those most directly impacted an opportunity to be heard.

Read the filing here and click here to read more about the Trump administration's collusive settlement strategy.

To date, the City of New Haven has joined six lawsuits against the Trump administration and signed on to 26 amicus briefs and seven Comments on Public Rules.