Judge Permanently Blocks Trump Order To Cut Funding From Sanctuary Cities

FILE - In this April 14, 2017, file photo, protesters hold up signs outside a courthouse where a federal judge was to hear arguments in the first lawsuit challenging President Donald Trump's executive order to withhold funding from communities that limit cooperation with immigration authorities in San Francisco.  A federal judge Monday, Nov. 20, 2017 has permanently blocked President Donald Trump's executive order to cut funding from cities that limit cooperation with U.S. immigration authorities. San Francisco and Santa Clara County had filed lawsuits. (AP Photo/Haven Daley, File)
FILE - In this April 14, 2017, file photo, protesters hold up signs outside a courthouse where a federal judge was to hear arguments in the first lawsuit challenging President Donald Trump's executive order to withho... FILE - In this April 14, 2017, file photo, protesters hold up signs outside a courthouse where a federal judge was to hear arguments in the first lawsuit challenging President Donald Trump's executive order to withhold funding from communities that limit cooperation with immigration authorities in San Francisco. A federal judge Monday, Nov. 20, 2017, has permanently blocked President Donald Trump's executive order to cut funding from cities that limit cooperation with U.S. immigration authorities. San Francisco and Santa Clara County had filed lawsuits. (AP Photo/Haven Daley, File) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A federal judge on Monday permanently blocked President Donald Trump’s executive order to cut funding from cities that limit cooperation with U.S. immigration authorities.

U.S. District Court Judge William Orrick rejected the administration’s argument that the executive order applies only to a relatively small pot of money and said Trump cannot set new conditions on spending approved by Congress.

The judge had previously made the same arguments in a ruling that put a temporary hold on the executive order targeting so-called sanctuary cities. The Trump administration has appealed that decision to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

“The District Court exceeded its authority today when it barred the President from instructing his cabinet members to enforce existing law,” Department of Justice spokesman Devin O’Malley said in a statement late Monday. “The Justice Department will vindicate the President’s lawful authority to direct the executive branch.”

Orrick’s ruling came in lawsuits brought by two California counties, San Francisco and Santa Clara.

San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera said the ruling was “a victory for the American people and the rule of law.”

“President Trump might be able to tweet whatever comes to mind, but he can’t grant himself new authority because he feels like it,” he said in a statement.

A lawyer for the DOJ argued during a hearing before Orrick in April that the executive order applied to only a few grants that would affect less than $1 million for Santa Clara County and possibly no money for San Francisco.

But the judge disagreed, saying in his rulings that the order was written broadly to “reach all federal grants” and potentially jeopardized hundreds of millions of dollars in funding to San Francisco and Santa Clara.

He cited comments by the president and Attorney General Jeff Sessions as evidence that the order was intended to target a wide array of federal funding. And he said the president himself had called it a “weapon” to use against recalcitrant cities.

The Trump administration separately has also moved to withhold one particular law enforcement grant from sanctuary cities, prompting a new round of lawsuits that are pending.

Latest News

Notable Replies

  1. “We’re going to win. We’re going to win so much. We’re going to win at trade, we’re going to win at the border. We’re going to win so much, you’re going to be so sick and tired of winning, you’re going to come to me and go ‘Please, please, we can’t win anymore.’ You’ve heard this one. You’ll say ‘Please, Mr. President, we beg you sir, we don’t want to win anymore. It’s too much. It’s not fair to everybody else. And I’m going to say ‘I’m sorry, but we’re going to keep winning, winning, winning, We’re going to make America great again.”
    — Comrade Cockholster, the daycare dotard, Rimrock Auto Arena at MetraPark, Billings, Montana, May 26, 2016

  2. A lawyer for the DOJ argued the executive order would affect less than $1 million for Santa Clara County and possibly no money for San Francisco.

    You have a losing hand when your best argument in support of the executive order is the ineffectiveness of the executive order.

  3. Trump’s gonna be pissed. All this “checks and balances” stuff is totally getting in the way of playing fake dictator. I hope the son of a bitch is fuming over this. He deserves to be miserable.

  4. Even now, remnants of our democracy still function for the good. New Orleans just proved to the feds that the city operated within the law and was not a sanctuary city. Local police are usually strapped for funds. Why should they have to do the work of the federal immigration authorities and jail immigrants for traffic tickets?

  5. Absolutely right.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

1 more reply

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for epicurus Avatar for thx1138 Avatar for junebug Avatar for tiowally Avatar for coimmigrant Avatar for katscherger

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