The Trump administration is expanding its immigration enforcement efforts through a new Justice Department interpretation that could require reporting across an entire state government, not just agencies that administer certain federal benefit programs.
The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel issued a legal opinion Sept. 1 reversing a nearly 30-year-old interpretation of a 1996 federal welfare law. DOJ announced the change publicly the following day.
The law requires states participating in Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF, and Supplemental Security Income, or SSI, to provide the Department of Homeland Security with information about people the state knows are unlawfully present in the United States.
Since 1998, DOJ had interpreted that requirement as applying only to the state agencies administering TANF or SSI.
The new opinion says the word “state” should instead be read to include the entire state government and all of its component agencies.
DOJ says the change does not create a new legal obligation, but rather restores what the department now considers Congress’ original intent.
“When a state chooses to participate in TANF, it accepts the obligation to report illegal aliens in the United States,” Assistant Attorney General T. Elliot Gaiser said in a DOJ statement.
The department says states that fail to comply could eventually face consequences, including the loss of program funding. The opinion applies prospectively, meaning states will not face penalties for relying on the previous interpretation in the past.
The change comes amid an escalating political and legal battle between New York and the Trump administration over immigration enforcement.
Earlier this year, Gov. Kathy Hochul signed a package of immigration laws that included the Local Cops, Local Crimes Act, which prohibits state and local law enforcement agencies from entering into 287(g) agreements with federal immigration authorities. Those agreements allow designated state and local officers to perform certain federal immigration enforcement functions.
Hochul has argued that local police, jails and other taxpayer funded resources should remain focused on local public safety rather than federal civil immigration enforcement.
ICE previously confirmed to Spectrum News 1 that it planned to expand its federal detention facility in Batavia by 100 beds after New York ended that local cooperation.
Republican state Sen. George Borrello represents the district that includes the Batavia facility and has been a vocal critic of the state’s immigration policies.
Asked whether the new DOJ interpretation puts New York on a collision course with Washington, Borrello said the conflict is already underway.
“Well, there’s no doubt that’s a collision course. It’s already a collision course,” Borrello said.
Borrello said he sees the issue as one of federal authority and argued that Washington is enforcing rules tied to federal law and federal funding.
“The federal government is enforcing federal law,” Borrello said. “They’re enforcing the Constitution, particularly when it comes to federal rules regarding citizenship and what it means to actually be considered a refugee or an asylum seeker.”
He also pointed to a broader Republican argument that New York is spending too much on benefits and services for noncitizens.
“The Democrat one party rule in New York state has been more focused on providing generous benefits to people who are not even citizens of New York, let alone citizens of the United States, versus the people of New York State that actually fund these things,” Borrello said.
The DOJ opinion, however, is specifically focused on the reporting obligations tied to state participation in TANF and SSI.
The central legal question is not whether unauthorized immigrants qualify for those two programs, but whether New York’s participation in them can be used to trigger a reporting requirement across the entire state government.
New York Attorney General Letitia James has already challenged a separate Trump administration policy involving TANF and immigration related information.
In August, James sued over a federal policy that sought broader access to TANF recipient data, including personal information that could be shared with federal immigration authorities.
In response to the latest DOJ interpretation, a spokesperson for James told Spectrum News 1 the office is reviewing the guidance.
“We are reviewing the guidance and will take action as needed to protect New Yorkers’ rights and services,” the spokesperson said.
Spectrum News 1 also requested comment from Hochul’s office, SUNY and the state Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance on how the new interpretation could affect New York agencies.
The DOJ opinion does not direct every state employee to independently investigate someone’s immigration status.
Rather, the law deals with individuals the state already knows are unlawfully present.
The new interpretation could still raise broader questions about which state agencies have reporting obligations and what information could establish that knowledge.
DOJ can change the executive branch’s interpretation of a federal statute, but it cannot change the language Congress enacted.
If New York rejects the new interpretation and the federal government later attempts to withhold funding, the dispute could become another federal court battle between Albany and Washington.