Court Rules Against Trump Policy To Withhold Grants From Sanctuary Cities

FOLEY SQUARE, NEW YORK, NY, UNITED STATES - 2017/02/07: High School and College students from across New York City walked out of classes at noon and congregated at Foley Square, united in opposition to the recent illegal executive order targeting Muslims and refugees, also known as the “Muslim Ban.”. (Photo by Erik Mcgregor/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images)
FOLEY SQUARE, NEW YORK, NY, UNITED STATES - 2017/02/07: High School and College students from across New York City walked out of classes at noon and congregated at Foley Square, united in opposition to the recent ill... FOLEY SQUARE, NEW YORK, NY, UNITED STATES - 2017/02/07: High School and College students from across New York City walked out of classes at noon and congregated at Foley Square, united in opposition to the recent illegal executive order targeting Muslims and refugees, also known as the Muslim Ban.. (Photo by Erik Mcgregor/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

CHICAGO (AP) — The federal government cannot withhold public safety grants from cities that refuse to cooperate with President Donald Trump’s immigration enforcement policies, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday, agreeing with a lower court judge who had imposed a temporary injunction last year.

The decision by a three-judge panel of the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Thursday says the administration exceeded its authority in establishing a new condition for cities to qualify for the grants.

The administration in July imposed a condition that cities receiving public safety grants must agree to inform federal agents when immigrants in the country illegally are about to be released from police detention. Chicago was among several cities that sued the administration.

U.S. District Judge Harry Leinenweber last September granted Chicago’s request for a temporary nationwide injunction. All three judges agreed Thursday with Leinenweber, meaning the nationwide injunction will remain in force. But one judge issued a partial dissent, saying that the ruling should apply to Chicago only.

Latest News

Notable Replies

  1. Avatar for caltg caltg says:

    Trump: "Damn these crooked judges, they are all corrupt and in the pocket of the Democrats. They are denying Americans the safety and security only I can give them."

    Twitter rampage begins in 5…4…3…2…1!

  2. An perennial oldie that refuses to age:

    “We’re going to win so much. You’re going to get tired of winning. You’re going to say, ‘Please, Mr. President, I have a headache. Please don’t win so much. This is getting terrible.’ And I’m going to say, ‘No, we have to make America great again.’ You’re gonna say, ‘Please.’ I said, ‘Nope, nope. We’re gonna keep winning.’"

  3. Handy-dandy new lede template for you, TPM.

    No charge…

    Court Rules Against Trump Policy To __________________________________________

  4. Incoming (at least when he gets off the golf course) …

  5. the administration exceeded its authority in establishing a new condition for cities to qualify for the grants.

    So, does this mean the Administration can impose this criteria on grants prior to receiving solicitations, or does it mean that Congress must include and pass the funding bills with this criteria as part of the grant program?

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

3 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for jaybeeraybee Avatar for tena Avatar for caltg Avatar for rickjones Avatar for tiowally Avatar for maximus

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: