By Jason Hopkins, DCNF
CALIFORNIA (DCNF, CONVERSEER) – An Obama-appointed judge ruled late Friday that the Trump administration could not deny federal funds to dozens of cities and counties over their sanctuary policies.
U.S. District Judge William Orrick, appointed to the bench in Northern California by President Barack Obama, extended a preliminary injunction that blocks the Trump administration from withholding or conditioning federal funds from jurisdictions that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration authorities, according to court documents. The lawsuit, originally filed by San Francisco officials earlier this year, has since taken on many other sanctuary jurisdictions as plaintiffs.
“The new plaintiffs have each alleged similar reliance on federal funding as the Cities and Counties and filed declarations showing similar harms to community health, welfare and social services and to their budgetary processes that depend on the regularly authorised grants of federal funding for a variety of critical needs,” Orrick stated, according to court documents.
“The challenged sections of Executive Orders 14,159 and 14,218, and the executive actions that have parroted them threaten to withhold all federal funding from the plaintiffs as sanctuary jurisdictions if they do not adapt their policies and practices to conform with the Trump administration’s preferences,” the judge continued. “That coercive threat (and any actions agencies take to realise that threat, or additional Executive Orders the President issues to the same end) is unconstitutional, so I enjoined its effect. I do so again today for the protection of the new parties in this case.”
The Obama-appointed judge has consistently ruled against the Trump administration’s quest to end sanctuary policies across the country.
READ ALSO: How Loni Anderson died from metastatic uterine leiomyosarcoma
In April, Orrick deemed President Donald Trump’s executive orders cracking down on sanctuary cities to be likely unconstitutional, blocking his administration from enforcing them against a slate of liberal enclaves that were suing. “Here we are again,” the judge wrote in the April order, referring to a previous executive order Trump signed in his first presidential term seeking to defund sanctuary cities — an order that Orrick also shot down at the time.
In 2017, Trump signed Executive Order 13,768, titled “Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States,” a directive that sought to block federal funds from sanctuary jurisdictions. Following a court challenge by San Francisco, Orrick ruled the order to be unconstitutional and that the defendants “faced irreparable harm absent an injunction,” according to court documents.
There is no official definition for a “sanctuary city” law or policy, but the label generally describes any policy for law that restricts local officials from assisting or otherwise cooperating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) or other federal immigration agents. Typical sanctuary policies prohibit local law enforcement from honouring ICE detainer requests, sharing information with the agency or notifying immigration agents of an impending release of a wanted illegal migrant.
Much like his first term, Trump has ratcheted up pressure against sanctuary cities, which have served as a major hindrance to his immigration enforcement agenda.
Much like his first term, Trump has ratcheted up pressure against sanctuary cities, which have served as a major hindrance to his immigration enforcement agenda.
Immediately upon his return to office, the president signed an executive order directing the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Department of Homeland Security to deny certain federal funds to sanctuary jurisdictions. The DOJ has since maintained a list of cities, counties and states it deems to be sanctuary havens for illegal migrants.
Democrat leaders have sued elsewhere to block the anti-sanctuary directives.
A lawsuit, filed Monday in Rhode Island federal court, alleges that the Office for Victims of Crime — an office within the DOJ — created a policy that withholds Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) funding from states that are not assisting with Trump’s mission to crack down on illegal immigration. A coalition of Democrat attorneys general claims these “unprecedented conditions” tying VOCA funds to immigration enforcement to be unlawful.
