When the state of Nevada unexpectedly landed on the Trump administration’s list of so-called “sanctuary states,” it seemed to take pretty much everyone by surprise. 

Elected officials were quick to push back and request an explanation of what policies could have possibly convinced the Department of Justice (DOJ) that we’re flouting federal immigration law. 

Being included on the DOJ’s list of “sanctuary states, cities and counties” isn’t mere politics. It could come with actual consequences. The Trump administration has already threatened to sue and withhold federal funds from jurisdictions it believes are impeding the “enforcement of immigration laws” through sanctuary policies — describing such policies in an April executive order as “lawless insurrection against the supremacy of Federal law.”

So, what egregious actions landed Nevada on the shortlist of supposedly treasonous scofflaw jurisdictions? 

Well, we don’t really know.

Far from local officials using “their authority to violate, obstruct, and defy the enforcement of Federal immigration laws,” Nevada has shown reasonable cooperation with federal agencies. Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo has even authorized Nevada’s National Guard to “temporarily” support immigration enforcement, and the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department has been formally partnered with Immigration and Customs Enforcement since June of this year. 

However, this isn’t the first time the “sanctuary” term has been thrown Nevada’s way. In May, Las Vegas was placed on a similar list compiled by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). That list was ultimately taken down, but not before local officials expressed both surprise and indignation at the city’s inclusion. 

“The entire City of Las Vegas is surprised,” Las Vegas Mayor Shelley Berkley said at the time. “We have never been a sanctuary city, we are not a sanctuary city, we're not going to be a sanctuary city.”

And yet, for at least a few days, the city was listed on the DHS website as one that “endangers American communities” by “shamefully obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws.”

As The Nevada Independent reported, one theory for Nevada’s recent inclusion on DOJ’s list is the mere existence of the Governor’s Office for New Americans (ONA) — a recently created, small state agency that helps “new and aspiring Americans” integrate into their local communities. 

According to Victor Joecks, a conservative columnist for the Las Vegas Review-Journal, a single link on ONA’s website directing visitors to a UNLV immigration clinic that provides legal resources to immigrants facing deportation might have been enough to rouse the ire of the DOJ. It’s since been removed from the ONA’s site.

As Mayor Berkley explained during a recent press conference, pretty much any minor provocation could be the reason for Nevada’s inclusion on the list — so an office dedicated to providing immigrants with resources might well have been all it took. 

However, if a state agency providing resources for new immigrants is enough for the DOJ to describe an otherwise decidedly non-sanctuary state as being engaged in insurrection against federal law, it says far more about the pernicious pettiness of the Trump administration than anything about Nevada. After all, the mere existence of such an office is hardly the same thing as “materially imped[ing] enforcement” of federal immigration laws.

Even ONA’s supposed willingness to point immigrants toward legal help can hardly be considered an affront to federal authority. At “worst,” it would be an attempt to provide immigrants with access to the resources needed for exercising their Fifth Amendment rights — rights that are guaranteed to all persons in the United States, regardless of legal status or the Trump administration’s contempt for due process. 

Regardless, it’s not even clear at this point that ONA is the only possible reason for the DOJ’s decision. Neither the DOJ nor any other federal agency has provided Nevada officials with a precise explanation of why the state has been classified as a sanctuary — nor has it provided clear guidance on how to avoid having funds cut as a result. 

For all we know, there could be countless reasons for Nevada’s designation — reasons known only to the federal bureaucrats who compiled the list, making it impractical for any state to confidently meet the administration’s arbitrary expectations. 

Unfortunately, this is hardly the first time Nevada has found itself dealing with the whimsical and arbitrary nature of this administration’s approach to governing. “Breaking news” on anything from immigration to international trade is a daily occurrence nowadays as significant policy changes are thrown into the news cycle on a whim from the president’s Truth Social account. 

The result has been record levels of uncertainty in the economy. And, judging by the reaction to last week’s sanctuary list from the DOJ, that uncertainty is palpable among elected officials as well.

Making matters worse, however, is the way in which the Trump White House has fully embraced (and tried to expand) executive power to achieve its policy preferences. As much as Republicans used to loathe President Barack Obama’s use of a “pen and phone,” the Trump presidency is on course to be significantly more imperial in nature. 

Combined with Trump’s characteristically bombastic and haphazard governing style, such a monarchical approach to creating federal policy does little to offer states, citizens or anyone else the clarity needed to actually follow the law — let alone know when they’re about to run afoul of vague federal expectations. 

With such an impulsive and chaotic approach to implementing his transient and ever-changing agenda for making America great, who knows what minor transgression encouraged the DOJ to label Nevada as a usurper of federal authority. 

Perhaps, all things considered, we really shouldn’t have been that surprised after all.

Michael Schaus is a communications and branding expert based in Las Vegas, Nevada, and founder of Schaus Creative LLC — an agency dedicated to helping organizations, businesses and activists tell their story and motivate change. He has more than a decade of experience in public affairs commentary, having worked as a news director, columnist, political humorist, and most recently as the director of communications for a public policy think tank. Follow him on Twitter @schausmichael or on Substack @creativediscourse.