A Federal Judge Just Blocked Trump’s Executive Order Targeting Sanctuary Cities

Once again, the administration’s public comments undermined his agenda.

Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call via AP

Facts matter: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter. Support our nonprofit reporting. Subscribe to our print magazine.


A federal judge in San Francisco blocked a January executive order that the Trump administration was using to threaten to withhold funds from so-called sanctuary jurisdictions refusing full cooperation with federal enforcement of immigration laws.

In issuing a nationwide preliminary injunction Tuesday, US District Judge William Orrick cited public comments by President Donald Trump, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, and other administration officials that warned cities that they would lose public safety funds if they did not comply with federal immigration agents’ attempts to locate and detain undocumented immigrants. “If there was doubt about the scope of the Order, the President and Attorney General have erased it with their public comments,” Orrick wrote.

But it wasn’t just these public comments that influenced Orrick’s ruling. He also found serious constitutional problems with the executive action. The judge’s decision states the executive order goes beyond the president’s authority under the 10th Amendment, which limits the federal government’s authority over local governments. “The Executive Order uses coercive means in an attempt to force states and local jurisdictions to honor civil detainer requests, which are voluntary ‘requests’ precisely because the federal government cannot command states to comply with them under the Tenth Amendment,” it reads.

The injunction comes out of a lawsuit brought by San Francisco and Santa Clara counties over Trump’s directive, with similar suits pending in other courts. Orrick’s order, which is based on the counties’ likelihood of success in their case, comes just a few days shy of Trump’s 100th day in office, when his administration is attempting to tout his accomplishments despite setbacks in Congress and in the courts.

WE'RE TAKING A SHORT BREAK…

from the big banner at the top of our pages asking for the donations that make Mother Jones' nonprofit journalism possible. But we still have upwards of $300,000 to raise by June 30, whether we get there is going to come down to the wire, and we can't afford to come up short.

If you value the reporting you get from Mother Jones and you can right now, please join your fellow readers who pitch in from time to time to keep our democracy-advancing, justice-seeking journalism charging hard (and to help us avoid a real budget crunch as June 30 approaches and our fiscal year ends).

payment methods

WE'RE TAKING A SHORT BREAK…

from the big banner at the top of our pages asking for the donations that make Mother Jones' nonprofit journalism possible. But we still have upwards of $300,000 to raise by June 30, whether we get there is going to come down to the wire, and we can't afford to come up short.

If you value the reporting you get from Mother Jones and you can right now, please join your fellow readers who pitch in from time to time to keep our democracy-advancing, justice-seeking journalism charging hard (and to help us avoid a real budget crunch as June 30 approaches and our fiscal year ends).

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate