DOJ sues Maryland over ‘Community Trust Act’: allegations and what to watch next
On July 9, 2026, DOJ sued Maryland over its Community Trust Act, seeking declaratory and permanent injunctive relief under the Supremacy Clause.
On July 9, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a federal lawsuit against Maryland and Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown over the state’s “Community Trust Act” (S.B. 791). In the complaint, the federal government asks a U.S. district court to declare the law unconstitutional under the Supremacy Clause and to enter a permanent injunction barring enforcement of the challenged provisions.
The case is docketed as 1:26-cv-2719 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland.
What DOJ says the Community Trust Act does
DOJ describes the Community Trust Act as limiting how Maryland and local officials may support federal immigration enforcement. In the complaint, DOJ alleges the Act restricts several cooperation pathways that federal immigration authorities rely on—especially where state and local agencies would share information or hold/transfer people who are in local custody.
Specifically, the complaint alleges the Act:
- Limits information-sharing: it forbids state law enforcement from providing federal immigration authorities with information about an individual obtained in the course of law-enforcement duties unless required by a valid court order.
- Limits local custody actions: it restricts when local correctional facilities may detain or prolong detention of an individual at the request of federal immigration authorities without a valid judicial warrant, and it bars notification and transfer to federal authorities unless required by a valid court order or judicial warrant (with limited exceptions DOJ says are not enough).
WTOP, citing the law’s provisions, describes the Community Trust Act as broadly prohibiting state law enforcement from holding people for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement without a judicial warrant and limiting how local authorities communicate with ICE.
DOJ’s constitutional theory: Supremacy Clause and preemption
The complaint argues that the Supremacy Clause bars states from enacting laws that interfere with how the federal government implements immigration law. DOJ frames its claims around federal preemption—arguing federal statutes and enforcement mechanisms override Maryland’s restrictions.
What DOJ is asking the court to do
DOJ’s complaint explicitly requests “declaratory and injunctive relief.” In the “Prayer for Relief,” the United States asks the court to:
- Enter declaratory relief: a judgment declaring the challenged Community Trust Act provisions violate the Supremacy Clause and other federal law, are preempted, and are therefore invalid.
- Enter a permanent injunction: barring the defendants (and their successors, agents, or employees) from enforcing the challenged provisions and any substantially similar future policies.
- Award fees and costs, and “other relief” the court deems just and proper.
That request matters for readers: a lawsuit filing and requested relief do not automatically mean a court has already blocked the law. The next question is what the judge orders as the case moves forward.
Maryland’s response: Brown disputes DOJ’s framing
Attorney General Anthony G. Brown issued a statement on July 13, 2026. Brown said the Community Trust Act “does not prohibit Maryland law enforcement from working with federal authorities on criminal matters,” and that the law governs “how Maryland’s own state and local law enforcement resources may be used.” He also argued the Constitution does not allow the federal government to compel states to carry out federal immigration enforcement.
What happens next in federal court (and what to watch)
After a complaint is filed, the next steps typically include service on the defendants and responses in the assigned court, followed by early litigation over threshold issues like jurisdiction and procedure. In constitutional challenges to statutes, parties often move toward motions to dismiss and then merits briefing, with the possibility of early requests for interim court orders.
For readers, the practical “watch next” items are:
- Early docket activity after July 9, 2026 (service and any initial filings).
- Any request for interim relief (if DOJ or Maryland asks for an order before final resolution).
- Next motions and deadlines, especially any motion-to-dismiss schedule and briefing updates.
Why it matters beyond Maryland
Even though the case targets Maryland’s statute, it spotlights a broader conflict many communities face: where federal immigration enforcement meets state and local cooperation rules. Pending any court order, the immediate question for impacted agencies and service providers is how federal requests and state/local compliance decisions should work while the lawsuit proceeds.
Sources
Discover more from Interactive News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
