Judge: Sessions Can’t Withhold Public Safety Grant Money To Sanctuary Cities

U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions gestures as he speaks during a news conference, Wednesday, Aug. 16, 2017, at PortMiami in Miami. As The White House wages a fight with cities and states over how far they can cooperate with federal immigration authorities, Sessions visited Miami to hail it as an example of a place that reversed its sanctuary policies to follow President Donald Trump’s orders. (AP Photo/Wilfredo Lee)
U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions speaks during a news conference, Wednesday, Aug. 16, 2017, at PortMiami in Miami. As The White House wages a fight with cities and states over how far they can cooperate with feder... U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions speaks during a news conference, Wednesday, Aug. 16, 2017, at PortMiami in Miami. As The White House wages a fight with cities and states over how far they can cooperate with federal immigration authorities, Sessions visited Miami to hail it as an example of a place that reversed its sanctuary policies to follow President Donald Trump's orders. (AP Photo/Wilfredo Lee) MORE LESS

CHICAGO (AP) — Attorney General Jeff Sessions can’t follow through — at least for now — with his threat to withhold public safety grant money to Chicago and other so-called sanctuary cities for refusing to impose new tough immigration policies, a judge ruled Friday in a legal defeat for the Trump administration.

In what is at least a temporary victory for cities that have defied Sessions, U.S. District Judge Harry Leinenweber ruled that the Justice Department could not impose the requirements.

He said the city had shown a “likelihood of success” in arguing that Sessions exceeded his authority with the new conditions. Among them are requirements that cities notify immigration agents when someone in the country illegally is about to be released from local jails and to allow agents access to the jails.

The city had asked the judge for a “nationwide” temporary injunction this week, asking the judge not to allow the Justice Department to impose the requirements until the city’s lawsuit against the department plays out in court.

City officials have said such a ruling would prevent the Justice Department from withholding what are called Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grants to the cities based on their refusal to take the steps Sessions ordered.

Chicago has applied for $2.2 million in the federal grant money — $1.5 million for the city and the rest for Cook County and 10 other suburbs. But in a recent court hearing, attorneys representing the city said that more than 30 other jurisdictions across the United States filed court briefs supporting Chicago’s lawsuit and have up to $35 million in grants at stake. At least seven cities and counties, including Seattle and San Francisco, as well as the state of California, are refusing to cooperate with the new federal rules.

Though the $1.5 million is just a tiny fraction of the city’s budget, the ruling could be a major victory for a city that has been in a public fight with Sessions. Mayor Rahm Emanuel has said the city would not “be blackmailed” into changing its values as a city welcoming of immigrants, and Sessions responded that the Trump administration would not “simply give away grant money to city governments that proudly violate the rule of law and protect criminal aliens at the expense of public safety.”

The ruling is another blow to Sessions, a longtime champion of tougher immigration laws. Earlier this month, Sessions announced that the administration would end a program that protects young immigrants who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children or came with families who overstayed their visas. Trump later announced he was working on an agreement to protect them.

Whether or not the ruling means that Leinenweber will ultimately decide in favor of the city is unclear.

During a hearing, Ron Safer, an attorney representing the city, said that if the Justice Department prevailed, it could use the same argument to “seize” even more authority to tie grant money to doing what he wants.

26
Show Comments

Notable Replies

  1. So much winning, so little time.

  2. And I am sure that the first act of Sessions when he heard the news was to look up the Judge to see if he was a Minority or a Democrat or both… not that he is a racist or anything.

  3. As is typical of ultra-conservatives like Li’l Jeffie, adherence to the law is for the hoi polloi—not for entitled racists like Sessions.

  4. Sessions prefers threats and punishments over civil rights, freedom, and voter rights. I’m glad a judge called him on it.

  5. Is it just me…

    Or does Beauregard keep trolling Trump with that get-a-load-of-the-size-of-these-babies finger pose?

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

20 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for fgs Avatar for kwoodgr Avatar for thehatter Avatar for wordtoyamamma Avatar for bojimbo26 Avatar for irasdad Avatar for tomanjeri Avatar for ottnott Avatar for fitley Avatar for blugrass Avatar for benthere Avatar for thunderclapnewman Avatar for tena Avatar for texastwostep Avatar for antisachetdethe Avatar for tsp Avatar for edgarant Avatar for bankerpup Avatar for tiowally Avatar for dannydorko Avatar for socalista Avatar for erik_t Avatar for middleway

Continue Discussion