The Trump administration cannot deny funds to Los Angeles and another 30 cities and counties due to “sanctuary” policies that limit their cooperation with federal immigration agencies, a judge ruled on Friday night.
The judge issued a preliminary judicial order that expands the restrictions issued by the court in April that blocked the cuts of funds to 16 cities and counties, including San Francisco and Santa Clara, after federal officials classified them as “sanctuary jurisdictions.”
The American district judge William Orrick, of the Federal Court in San Francisco, ruled that Trump's executive order that cut the financing was probably unconstitutional and violated the separation of the doctrine of the powers.
Friday's order added more than a dozen more jurisdictions to the preliminary court order, including Los Angeles, Alameda County, Berkeley, Baltimore, Boston and Chicago.
Mayor Karen Bass applauded the Court's decision.
“Another victory for our city while the courts continue to make it clear that the attempts of the Federal Government to inflict their cruel policies about Angels are illegal,” Bass said in a statement to The Times. “We will always defend Angelenos' rights to these continuous assaults on our city.”
In a statement, a White House spokesman said that the Trump administration hoped that it finally wins in its appeal effort.
“The government, at all levels, has the duty to protect American damage citizens,” said Abigail Jackson, a White House spokesman, in a statement. “The Sanctuary cities interfere with the federal application of immigration at the expense and security of US citizens. We look forward to the final claim on the subject.”
The preliminary judicial order is the last chapter in a continuous effort of the Trump administration to force the “sanctuary cities” to help and compromise local resources to federal immigration application efforts.
Earlier this month, the United States Department of Justice published a list of what determined that they were sanctuary jurisdictions, or local entities that have “policies, laws or regulations that prevent the application of federal immigration laws.”
“The sanctuary policies prevent the application of the law and put at risk American citizens by design,” Atty. General Pamela Bondi said in a statement that accompanies the published list.
Several cities and counties throughout the country have adopted the policies of the Sanctuary City, but the details about what measure are willing, or are not willing, to be done for federal immigration officials have varied.
Policies generally do not prevent federal officials from carrying out immigration application activities, but rather avoid to a large extent that local jurisdictions commit resources to efforts.
Policies also prevent local agencies from enforcing judicial orders, which are signed by a judge. Cooperation in “Detachors” or keeps imprisoned suspects issued by federal agencies, together with the application of civil immigration issues, is generally limited by sanctuary policies.
Federal lawsuits have so far referred to the jurisdictions of “sanctuary” as local governments that do not honor immigration arrest requests, do not help with administrative orders, do not share information from the immigration state, or do not allow the local police to help in immigration application operations.
Orrick pointed out that the executive orders threatened to retain all federal funds if the cities and counties in question did not adhere to the requests of the Trump administration.
In the order, the judge referred to the executive order as a “coercive threat” and said it was unconstitutional.
Orrick, who sits on the bank in the Northern District of California, was appointed by former President Obama.
The Trump administration has been increasing efforts to force local jurisdictions to help in the application of immigration. The administration has filed demands against cities and counties, increased street operations and immigration arrests, and has deployed National Guard troops to Los Angeles as immigration operations increased.
The United States Department of Justice in June sued Los Angeles, and local officials, claiming that its law of the sanctuary is “illegal.”
The lawsuit claimed that the city was looking to “frustrate the will of the American people with respect to deportations” promulgating the policies of the sanctuary.
