Federal Judge Dismisses Trump Administration Lawsuit Against Rochester's Sanctuary City Policy

Rochester has been a sanctuary city since May 1986. On September 2, 2026, a federal judge dismissed the Trump administration's Rochester sanctuary city lawsuit — and barred any refiling.

Judge Frank Geraci of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York dismissed the Department of Justice's suit against Rochester's sanctuary policies with prejudice. The case cannot be amended. It cannot be refiled in this court.

The Ruling: Rochester Sanctuary City Lawsuit Dismissed With Prejudice

The Ruling: Rochester Sanctuary City Lawsuit Dismissed With Prejudice

This marks the second dismissal of a DOJ lawsuit against Rochester's sanctuary city policy in this venue. Judge Geraci dismissed the first attempt, then watched the department file an amended complaint — and dismissed that one too, this time permanently.

The department's legal strategy rested on three arguments: that Rochester violated the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, that the city discriminated against the federal government, and that its policies obstructed federal immigration enforcement. Judge Geraci rejected all three. In his ruling, he found Rochester's sanctuary policies to be not "a prohibition on or interference with the federal government's role in enforcing immigration policy." The city was not obstructing federal law — it was setting local priorities.

How the Fight Started: A Policy That Didn't Flinch

How the Fight Started: A Policy That Didn't Flinch

The DOJ sued Rochester in 2025 over the city's limits on cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. What followed wasn't a retreat. The Rochester City Council passed expanded sanctuary legislation, codifying the policy into a municipal ordinance with broader protections than the declarations already on the books.

The city's sanctuary status dates to May 1986 — not a recent political stance, but a posture Rochester has held through multiple administrations and decades of shifting federal immigration policy. The 2025 ordinance extended that history with statutory teeth: violations by city employees now carry termination as the penalty.

What Rochester's Sanctuary Policy Actually Covers

What Rochester's Sanctuary Policy Actually Covers

The ordinance bars city employees — including police — from aiding immigration enforcement, questioning or detaining people based on immigration status, or sharing citizenship information with federal agencies.

The policy is not a blanket refusal to cooperate with federal authorities. Rochester officers can still assist federal agents when public safety or an emergency requires it. The ordinance limits the scope of that cooperation; it does not end it. That distinction shaped Judge Geraci's reasoning: what he upheld is a limit on function, not a refusal to govern.

What City Leaders Said — and What Comes Next

What City Leaders Said — and What Comes Next

Mayor Malik Evans did not minimize the ruling. "This is a win. This is a win for the residents of Rochester," he said. "This was about the federal government not pushing around cities like Rochester." In a separate statement, Evans called the legal challenge "grandstanding" found "without any legal legitimacy" and framed the city's position as a public safety commitment, not an immigration one.

City Council President Miguel Meléndez was equally direct.

"Lake Ontario will be Lake Ontario, just as Rochester will be a sanctuary city."

— City Council President Miguel Meléndez, September 2, 2026

He described the ruling as a validation of the city's work to uphold the Constitution "while protecting families in our community."

The DOJ retains the right to appeal Judge Geraci's ruling to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. Rochester's sanctuary status is now anchored in municipal ordinance — a harder target than the policy declarations the city held when the first lawsuit was filed.