SAN FRANCISCO—In a repeat of his decision from GOP President Donald Trump’s first term eight years ago, U.S. District Judge William Orrick in San Francisco upheld sanctuary cities.
This time, like before, the judge issued a nationwide injunction against Trump’s plan to deny federal cash to “sanctuary cities” which refuse to cooperate with Trump’s ICE raids and migrant roundups, sweeping up anyone who looks Hispanic.
In ruling against Trump’s monetary blackmail, Judge Orrick, nominated by Trump’s predecessor, Barack Obama, was just as scathing as he was then. He called it blatantly unconstitutional.
“The challenged sections in the 2025 executive orders” to Trump Attorney General Pam Bondi and other Cabinet officers “that order executive agencies to withhold, freeze, or condition federal funding apportioned to localities by Congress, violate the Constitution’s separation of powers principles and the Spending Clause,” Orrick wrote.
“They also violate the Fifth Amendment to the extent they are unconstitutionally vague and violate due process,” while Trump’s EOs “violate the Tenth Amendment because they impose coercive conditions intended to commandeer local officials into enforcing federal immigration practices and law,” he wrote on April 24.
San Francisco led the challenge against Trump’s latest orders. Chicago, Los Angeles, Santa Clara and San Jose, Calif., Seattle, Portland, Ore., the Twin Cities, and New Haven, Conn., among others, joined.
Will Trump obey the court?
Left unclear is if Trump will obey the judge. Trump Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy wrote recipients of federal transit money, which include virtually all the sanctuary cities in the lawsuit, plus New York, must enforce federal law or face the financial consequences.
Left unsaid: An executive order against the sanctuary cities, now, as in 2017 when Orrick first bounced Trump’s move, isn’t a law.
“I’m so proud of the historic commitment by New Haven, that has been for many years,” said a veteran city activist, Joelle Fishman. “That gave us the strength to push the lawsuit and to challenge the crime, inhumanity, and lawlessness of this administration.”
“At a time when we continue to see tremendous federal overreach, the court’s ruling affirms local governments can serve their mission and maintain trust with the communities they care for,” Santa Clara, Calif., County Counsel Tony LoPresti said in a statement.
New York is in limbo. It has a sanctuary ordinance on the books and was enforcing it, until recently.
Then embattled and unpopular Mayor Eric Adams reached a plea bargain of sorts with Trump’s Justice Department: DOJ would drop bribery charges against Adams if he started singing Trump’s anti-immigrant tune, and let ICE agents roam around the Big Apple.
Adams dutifully complied. He even sent ICE agents to the city’s notorious jail on Riker’s Island—or tried to. Attorneys for migrant groups went to court in New York and stopped that. Meantime, the Trump-named acting U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, a traditional conservative Republican, resigned on principle since the deal was crafted over her head and without even consulting her. And three assistant U.S. attorneys followed her.
The U.S. Committee for Refugees and Migrants, which supports refugee rights worldwide, spoke out for the sanctuary cities as soon as Trump issued his executive orders, in late January, demanding cooperation and threatening a money cutoff.
“Sanctuary policies are designed to ensure that all residents, regardless of immigration status, can live without fear, contribute to their communities, and seek assistance from local law enforcement when necessary. The decision to strip funding threatens these principles and endangers entire communities,” the committee said.
“Cutting federal funding to sanctuary cities also violates the underlying principle of the Tenth Amendment, which protects states and localities from federal overreach. Such actions could disrupt critical programs funded by federal dollars, including public safety initiatives, disaster relief, housing support, and healthcare.”
Sanctuary cities also help in crime-fighting, the committee said, as migrants would be more cooperative with law enforcement, it said.
“Punitive measures like this are counterproductive, unjust, and antithetical to the values we hold as a nation,” concluded Eskinder Negash, the committee’s president and CEO.
CONTRIBUTOR
MOST POPULAR TODAY
Trump lawyers tell Supreme Court that Constitution doesn’t apply to the president
Top Trump official reveals intention for federal workers: ‘Put them in trauma’
As Republicans ram through Trump’s Medicaid cuts, critics predict: ‘People will die’
Israel further strangles Palestine by replacing its workers with imported labor