Workers are moving equipment and road signs on the highway. (Getty Images)

A federal judge in Rhode Island seemed likely to block the U.S. Department of Transport from moving billions of yanks in congressional funding for bridges, roads and airport projects if Democratic-led states were not participating in federal immigration enforcement.

US District Judge John James McConnell Jr. said the federal agency “just have budgetary powers from Congress,” and at a hearing hearing US lawyer Sarah Miron Bloom on how the transportation department can take power over funds approved by Congress.

“That’s how the constitution works,” he said. “Where does the secretary get the power and authority to impose immigration conditions on transport funds?”

The lawsuit brought by 20 Democratic attorney generals is April order It calls for the state to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement to receive federal grants already approved by Congress from Transport Secretary Shawn Duffy, a former Wisconsin representative.

“The defendants are trying to retain tens of millions of dollars of vital transport funds to force plaintiffs’ states to become merely weapons of the federal immigration enforcement policy,” said Delbert Tran of the California Department of Justice, who claimed on behalf of the state.

On behalf of the Trump administration, Bloom said Duffy’s letter simply directs the state to comply with federal immigration laws.

McConnell, appointed by former President Barack Obama in 2011, said that while states could interpret it that way, the Trump administration has pursued so-called sanctuary cities and targeted the same aggressive immigration enforcement as the administration.

The judge said Bloom’s argument expressed a “very different” interpretation of the order than the way the administration publicly described it. He also said President Donald Trump and Homeland Security Secretary Christy Noem “drifted away” the issues that arise from the sanctuary cities.

Trump this week US immigration and customs enforcement has directed targeting Chicago, Los Angeles and New York. It is three major Democratic-led cities with policies that do not support immigration enforcement.

McConnell said it will decide whether to issue a provisional injunction by Friday. The interim injunction will be tailored to states that will file lawsuits and have no effect nationwide.

The states filed the lawsuits are California, Illinois, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Maryland, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin.

It will undermine the parliament

Tran said the Department of Transport’s directive is not only arbitrary and whimsical, but it undermines Congress’ authority as it allocated more than $100 billion to transport projects to the state.

Cutting funds would have disastrous consequences, the state argued.

“If more cars, planes and trains crash, and as a result, the defendant cut off federal funds for the plaintiffs’ state, more people will die.” According to a brief from the state.

Transportation Security and Immigration

Bloom defended Duffy’s letter, citing actions that hindered federal law enforcement, citing “they’d undermine the safety and security of the transport systems supported by DOT’s financial support,” and justifying the withholding of funds.

McConnell said he did not answer his question about the secretary’s authority to withhold funds allocated to Congress.

“The secretary appears to be saying that failure to comply with immigration conditions is related to the safety and security of the transportation system,” Bloom said.

McConnell was skeptical of the argument.

“Under that rationale, does the Secretary of Transport have the authority to impose conditions on federal highway funds that prohibit states that have legalized abortions from seeking federal grants?” he asked.

Bloom said the questions exceeded her orders from the Department of Transport and directives to address her arguments to the court.

“I understand your question,” she said. “What I think I can say is that in his statement the secretary provided the rationale for why this is related to DOT funding.”

Tran said the “core of this case” by requiring the state to participate in immigration enforcement, saying the Trump administration will “try to enforce other laws that do not apply to these grants.”

“It goes beyond their legal authority,” he argued.