‘Outside of the bounds of the Constitution’: Judge deals another blow to Trump’s sanctuary city crusade, blocks funding cuts for 34 more jurisdictions

The Trump administration has, once again, been blocked from slashing federal funding for sanctuary jurisdictions in a newly extended order, with a federal judge now prohibiting the government from punishing more than 30 additional cities and counties across the country after issuing a similar block earlier this year.

U.S. District Judge William Orrick handed down an updated preliminary injunction late Friday in the Northern District of California after protecting 16 cities and counties from funding cuts in April, as previously reported by Law&Crime.

This time, Orrick delivered relief to 34 more jurisdictions across the U.S. — including Baltimore, Chicago and Los Angeles — after adding a group of new plaintiffs on Aug. 5 to the ongoing lawsuit against President Donald Trump and his administration that spurred the original injunction. Orrick’s Friday order “mirrors the first” to protect the newly added cities and counties, the judge said.

“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 authorized grants of federal funding for a variety of critical needs,” Orrick explained. “Defendants offer no opposition to entry of the expanded preliminary injunction except to say that the order granting the preliminary injunction and further order were wrongly decided in the first place and no plaintiff is entitled to the relief sought.”

Love true crime? Sign up for our newsletter, The Law&Crime Docket, to get the latest real-life crime stories delivered right to your inbox.

Orrick, a Barack Obama appointee, condemned the Trump administration for enacting executive orders and related agency directives that were “unconstitutional violations of the separation of powers and spending clause doctrines.” He echoed his previous order and said the attempts to cut funding violate the Fifth Amendment, the Tenth Amendment, and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

“The challenged sections of executive orders … 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,” Orrick pointed out. “That coercive threat (and any actions agencies take to realize 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.”

In February, the plaintiffs sued President Trump and others over two executive orders — “Protecting the American People Against Invasion” and “Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Open Borders” — issued in January and February, which asked administrative agencies to look for ways to cut off all federal funding for jurisdictions challenging the administration’s anti-immigrant policies.

After the lawsuit was initially filed, the plaintiffs sought a preliminary injunction – which they won. The plaintiffs later pushed for a clarifying order after the 45th and 47th president issued an additional executive order aimed at sanctuary jurisdictions in April – which they also won. Along the way, the court also issued a so-called “further order” explaining why the plaintiffs are likely to succeed and granted several judicial notice requests which brought several policy memos issued by agency heads into the litigation.

Orrick was asked in early August to allow the additional 34 jurisdictions into the lawsuit and to secure the protections of the injunctive relief already issued.

“I issued the [original] preliminary injunction to prevent the defendants from taking actions with respect to federal funding for so-called sanctuary jurisdictions that fall outside of the bounds of the Constitution, particularly because of their overly coercive effect,” Orrick said Friday. “It bars the defendants (and their officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, and any other persons in active concert or participation with them) from, in relevant part, taking any action to withhold, freeze, or condition federal funds from the cities and counties.

The Trump administration has appealed his original order.

“The government — at all levels — has the duty to protect American citizens from harm,” White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson told the Los Angeles Times after Orrick’s ruling was handed down Friday. “Sanctuary cities interfere with federal immigration enforcement at the expense and safety and security of American citizens,” Jackson said. “We look forward to ultimate vindication on the issue.”

Colin Kalmbacher contributed to this report. 

The post ‘Outside of the bounds of the Constitution’: Judge deals another blow to Trump’s sanctuary city crusade, blocks funding cuts for 34 more jurisdictions first appeared on Law & Crime.