Executive Order
#14159 -- Protecting the American People Against Invasion (January 20, 2025)
Highlights
The primary objective of the EO is to enforcement the immigration laws through the deportation of people living in the US illegally. To rapidly expand ICE/DHS agents, the EO encourages state and local jurisdictions to enter formal agreements with ICE under Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
Key Compliance/Risk Cue
The deputization of local law enforcement effectively turns local police into ICE agents. This blurs the line between local policing and federal immigration enforcement. Law enforcement, whether deputized or not, should expect an erosion of community trust in their local police.
Litigation Snapshot
EO 14159 is currently facing multiple legal challenges across various federal courts. These lawsuits argue that it: (1) coerces states/jurisdictions by threatening federal funding; (2) expands deportation powers without due process; and (3) restricts attorney access to detained individuals.
In City and County of San Francisco v. Trump, filed in February 2025, several “sanctuary” jurisdictions—including San Francisco, Santa Clara County, and Portland—argue that the EO unlawfully conditions federal funding on immigration enforcement cooperation, violating the Tenth Amendment, the Spending Clause, and the APA. A preliminary injunction was granted in April 2025. A related case, City of Chelsea v. Trump, filed in Massachusetts, raises similar claims. Separately, Make the Road New York v. Huffman, filed in January 2025, challenges the EO’s expansion of expedited removal as a violation of due process and immigration law. Additional lawsuits, including Amica Center for Immigrant Rights v. DOJ and American Gateways v. DOJ, target EO 14159’s impact on immigrants’ access to legal counsel while in detention. As of July 2025, these cases remain active and/or are in the midst of an appeal, with at least one preliminary injunction in effect.