Zohran Mamdani and New York City are suing Trump over a new immigration rule, as the mayor accuses federal officials of targeting immigrants.
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has escalated his confrontation with the Trump administration, joining a group of Democratic-led cities in a lawsuit challenging a new federal immigration policy.
Mamdani accused the federal government of waging what he called a “campaign of violence and terror” against New York City’s immigrant communities as the city moved to challenge the administration’s expanded public-charge policy in federal court.
The lawsuit comes as the Trump administration prepares to implement a revised rule that gives immigration officials broader discretion to consider an immigrant’s use—or potential use—of certain public benefits when deciding whether to approve green cards and visas.
Mamdani makes stunning accusation against Trump administration
Mamdani sharply criticized the federal policy during an announcement about the lawsuit, arguing that the rule could cause immigrant families to avoid programs they are legally entitled to use.
The New York mayor said federal immigration policies were creating fear among immigrant communities and accused the administration of targeting people seeking access to health care, food assistance and housing programs.
The accusation marks another major flashpoint between Mamdani and President Donald Trump, whose administrations have repeatedly clashed over immigration enforcement and the role of federal authorities in New York City.
Mamdani has positioned New York City as a leading opponent of Trump’s immigration agenda, particularly policies affecting immigrant families and sanctuary jurisdictions.
New York joins cities challenging Trump’s immigration rule
New York City is among several Democratic-led jurisdictions challenging the new policy.
The lawsuit involving Mamdani’s administration includes cities such as Chicago, San Francisco and Seattle, which argue that the federal government’s expanded interpretation of the public-charge rule could discourage eligible immigrants from seeking government assistance.
The jurisdictions contend that the policy could also affect U.S. citizen children in mixed-status families if their parents become afraid to use public programs.
The cities are seeking to prevent the administration from enforcing the rule.
What Trump’s new public-charge rule does
The revised policy gives federal immigration officials greater discretion to determine whether applicants for green cards or visas are likely to become dependent on public assistance.
Programs that could factor into immigration decisions include certain health care, food and housing benefits.
The administration argues the policy is intended to ensure that immigrants seeking permanent legal status are less likely to become dependent on taxpayers.
Critics argue that the rule goes too far and could discourage families from accessing assistance even when they are legally eligible to receive it.
The policy is scheduled to take effect September 18.
Letitia James launches separate lawsuit
New York City’s legal challenge comes alongside another lawsuit led by New York Attorney General Letitia James.
James and a coalition of states are also challenging the Trump administration’s public-charge policy, arguing that the federal government exceeded its authority and failed to follow required procedures when implementing the rule.
The parallel lawsuits demonstrate the scale of the opposition developing around the policy.
James has argued that the rule could pressure immigrant families to choose between maintaining their immigration prospects and accessing essential services for which they qualify.
Trump administration defends the policy
The Trump administration has defended the new rule as a legitimate immigration policy designed to protect taxpayers.
Federal officials argue that immigration authorities should be able to consider whether applicants are likely to rely heavily on public assistance when evaluating applications for visas and permanent residency.
The administration has also criticized sanctuary jurisdictions for challenging federal immigration policies.
The lawsuits will now place the policy’s future in the hands of the federal courts as the September implementation date approaches.
A new front in Mamdani’s battle with Trump
The lawsuit adds another front to the growing political and legal conflict between Mamdani and Trump.
For New York City, the dispute goes beyond immigration enforcement. City officials argue that federal policies can have direct consequences for local health care systems, housing programs and social services.
Mamdani’s strongest criticism has focused on what he says is the chilling effect of federal immigration policies—the possibility that immigrants and mixed-status families will avoid government programs because they fear those actions could affect their immigration status.
The Trump administration disputes that characterization and says its policy is designed to enforce existing immigration standards.
With the rule scheduled to take effect this week, the court battle could quickly become a major test of how much authority the federal government has to determine the role public-benefit use plays in immigration decisions.
For Mamdani, the lawsuit represents a significant escalation in his effort to challenge Trump’s immigration agenda and defend New York City’s immigrant communities.
Also read: Supreme Court Blocks Trump Mail-Ballot Rules Before Midterms
