New York Post

Judge puts temporary ban on feds’ $lash bid

- By BOB FREDERICKS and MARISA SCHULTZ

A federal judge on Tuesday dealt another blow to President Trump’s national-security agenda — ruling that the administra­tion cannot force “sanctuary cities” like New York to cooperate with immigratio­n officers by withholdin­g funds.

California US District Judge William Orrick issued the temporary ruling, saying Trump had no authority to attach new conditions to federal spending.

His ruling came in a lawsuit filed by San Francisco and Santa Clara County against the president’s executive order.

The plaintiffs argued during an April 14 hearing that the order threatened billions of dollars in federal funding, making it difficult to plan their budgets.

Federal law does not define “sanctuary cities,” and the Trump administra­tion had given differing descriptio­ns of the policies it was looking to enforce.

More than 300 cities and counties nationwide have placed limits on how far their law-enforcemen­t agencies can go in cooperatin­g with federal immigratio­n officials looking to detain and deport immigrants for crimes or illegal entry into the United States.

“The counties have demonstrat­ed that they are likely to succeed on the merits of their . . . challenge to the executive order, that they will suffer irreparabl­e harm absent an injunction, and that the balance of harms and public interest weigh in their favor,” Orrick wrote.

The decision will stay in place while the lawsuit works its way through the courts.

“It’s not like it’s just some small amount of money,” John Keker, an attorney for Santa Clara County, told Orrick, an Obama appointee, at the April 14 hearing.

The White House called the decision “egregious overreach” in a statement released Tuesday night, adding that the cities were being “dangerous and unlawful” by not following their orders.

“Ultimately, this is a fight between sovereignt­y and open borders, between the rule of law and lawlessnes­s, and between hardworkin­g Americans and those who would undermine their safety and freedom,” the statement read.

The White House also complained that the ruling came from a judge in San Francisco, “the same sanctuary city that released the five-time deported illegal immigrant who gunned down innocent Kate Steinle in her father’s arms.”

Acting US Assistant Attorney General Chad Readler said the county and San Francisco were interpreti­ng the executive order too broadly.

The funding cutoff applies to three Justice and Homeland Security department grants that require complying with a federal law compelling local government­s not to block local officials from providing detainees’ immigratio­n status, he said.

The order would affect less than $1 million in funding for Santa Clara County and possibly no money for San Francisco, Readler said.

Trump was using the “bully pulpit,” the president’s ability to draw attention to an issue, to “encourage communitie­s and states to comply with the law,” he added.

In his ruling, Orrick sided with San Francisco and Santa Clara, saying the order, “by its plain language, attempts to reach all federal grants, not merely the three mentioned at the hearing.”

“The rest of the order is broader still, addressing all federal funding,” Orrick said. “And if there was doubt about the scope of the order, the president and attorney general have erased it with their public comments.”

Rep. Nydia Velázquez (D-NY) hailed the ruling.

“New York has made clear that we will not be an accomplice to implementi­ng anti-immigrant policies that tear apart families and sow fear in our communitie­s,” she said.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States