Biden‑appointed judges dismiss Trump and Brennan lawsuits over NYC sanctuary rules and DOJ records

U.S. District Judges Ramón E. Reyes Jr. and Jia Cobb each ruled the plaintiffs lacked standing, allowing New York City to keep its sanctuary policies and denying Brennan access to investigation files.

By Felo News Desk · Published Sun, 18 Oct 2026 02:18:40 GMT

A Biden‑appointed federal judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by the Trump administration challenging New York City’s sanctuary laws, while another Biden‑appointed judge threw out former intelligence official John Brennan’s request to preserve Department of Justice investigation records.

What happened

U.S. District Judge Ramón E. Reyes Jr. issued a ruling in Brooklyn on Thursday, rejecting the Justice Department’s claim that New York City must cooperate fully with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The case, filed in July 2025, sought to overturn city policies that limit ICE’s ability to detain individuals already in custody without a warrant and restrict what city employees can disclose to immigration officers.

On the same day, U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb dismissed John Brennan’s lawsuit, filed in July 2026, which asked the Justice Department to preserve records from investigations involving him. Cobb found Brennan’s claims speculative and lacking an imminent injury, concluding the plaintiff had no standing.

What the reports add

Legalinsurrection.com reported that Judge Reyes cited the city’s long‑standing sanctuary rules, in place since 2014, and noted that police and jail officials generally cannot hold someone for ICE without a judicial warrant and a qualifying violent‑crime conviction. The outlet also highlighted that the Justice Department argued New York was obstructing immigration enforcement.

The same outlet explained that Judge Cobb emphasized Brennan had not been charged with any crime and that his request for record preservation was “too speculative.” Cobb noted that Brennan’s own lawyer admitted the request was unusual and that no actual or imminent injury was shown.

What was said

Legalinsurrection.com quoted the court’s language that the Justice Department’s attempt to overturn the city’s restrictions was rejected, and that Brennan’s “suspicions, however strongly held, weren’t proof that anybody was deleting anything.”

How it came about

The sanctuary‑law lawsuit originated in July 2025 when the Trump administration sought to force New York City to cooperate with ICE, a move that would have reversed policies in place since 2014. Earlier this year, Felo News covered related legal battles over federal authority and local enforcement, including the reinstatement of a Trump‑appointed U.S. attorney in Seattle (see Roger Rogoff reinstated).

Brennan’s case stemmed from his July 2026 filing seeking to preserve DOJ records he believed might be needed to defend against future prosecutions. The request was unusual because no charges had been filed against him, and his own counsel acknowledged the speculative nature of the claim.

Key facts

U.S. District Judge Ramón E. Reyes Jr. dismissed the Trump administration’s lawsuit challenging NYC’s sanctuary laws. (legalinsurrection.com)
Judge Reyes ruled the city can continue limiting cooperation with ICE under policies dating to 2014. (legalinsurrection.com)
U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb dismissed John Brennan’s lawsuit seeking preservation of DOJ investigation records. (legalinsurrection.com)
Cobb found Brennan lacked standing because he showed no imminent injury and had not been charged. (legalinsurrection.com)