U.S. District Judge Frank Geraci has dismissed a court case filed by the U.S. Department of Justice against the city of Rochester over its sanctuary city policy.
In his judgment, filed Thursday in federal court, Geraci argued the complaint filed by the DOJ is now moot since the city adopted a new sanctuary policy over the summer. The original complaint was filed in April and sought to bar the city from following the policy, which forbids city employees, including police, from aiding in immigration enforcement.
Rochester first enacted a sanctuary city policy in 1986 and reaffirmed its status in 2017 and 2025. The most recent iteration includes added protections for LGBTQ individuals, as well as guidelines for disciplining employees who violate the policy, including possible termination. That policy was unanimously adopted by the Rochester City Council in August.
“The city has recently codified new sanctuary policies that none of the parties or amici have addressed,” Geraci wrote. “That intervening development renders the United States’s challenge to the 2017 directives moot.”
The DOJ did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Geraci also wrote that it was unclear exactly what the DOJ was seeking from the court, noting that its filing requested issuing a “hold.” He described the motion, which also sought an advisory opinion from the federal court, as “unusual.”
"Federal courts are not in the business of issuing “holdings.” Federal courts have no authority to issue “advisory opinions”
on the important political debates of the day," Geraci wrote, noting that while the Trump administration later appeared to clarify the relief sought, it was never clearly defined.
The case has been dismissed without prejudice, meaning the DOJ is free to submit an amended complaint to challenge the current sanctuary policy. They have until Dec. 19 to do so. But Geraci cautioned: "In any amended complaint, the United States should take care to articulate with precision the specific provisions that it challenges and the specific relief it seeks."
In a statement, Mayor Malik Evans said the city was pleased with the decision and "remains committed" to its sanctuary status, adding: "The City intends to continue to fully comply with federal and state laws while vigorously preserving our local autonomy and rights under the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.”
The complaint stems from a March incident, in which federal immigration enforcement requested, and received, the assistance of Rochester police in detaining three men from Guatemala off Lyell Avenue. Those officers were briefly taken off the street for additional training. Mayor Malik Evans and Rochester City Council President Miguel Meléndez were also named as defendants in that complaint.
The city's sanctuary policy does not forbid immigration officers from conducting raids, detaining people, or making arrests in the city. At its core, the case hinged on an argument of whether the city has an obligation to assist federal immigration enforcement. In a legal filing from September,
Patrick Beath, the city’s top attorney, argued the federal government’s position was an attempt to force local law enforcement to carry out federal responsibilities.
“The city of Rochester will not allow its limited local law enforcement resources to be unlawfully conscripted by federal law enforcement agents in order to carry out federal immigration policy by detaining individuals for non-criminal purposes, a responsibility that is exclusively that of the federal government,” Beath wrote.
In response, Alessandra Faso, acting assistant director of the DOJ, argued Rochester’s policy falls outside the bounds of local autonomy, and were meant to actively obstruct federal enforcement.
“While state and local cooperation with federal immigration enforcement is voluntary, Rochester’s policies take that choice away from its personnel,” Faso wrote. “This is a clear example of local policy intentionally frustrating the purpose of the federal immigration scheme.”
