Injunction blocking Trump’s order upheld
A U.S. District Court judge has upheld a preliminary injunction he previously granted blocking President Donald Trump’s executive order stripping Santa Clara County and other so-called “sanctuary jurisdictions” of federal funding.
Judge William Orrick on Thursday also denied the federal government’s request to dismiss the county’s Feb. 3 lawsuit against the administration.
“Once again, the District Court has sent a message to President Trump that he cannot use the threat of withholding funds to coerce local governments into becoming federal immigration operatives — an unconstitutional effort that puts at risk vital services for millions of people across the country,” said county Board of Supervisors President Dave Cortese.
“We are eager and prepared,” he added, “to pursue the lawsuit on behalf of Santa Clara County residents and communities across the country until the executive order is permanently struck down.”
With Santa Clara County and San Francisco’s landmark motion for a preliminary injunction upheld, the section of the executive order applying to sanctuary jurisdictions will not go into effect until the court rules on the county’s Feb. 3 lawsuit against the administration.
During a court hearing in April, federal attorneys confessed they have no idea how Trump’s executive order would actually work. They said the government at this point hasn’t identified any “sanctuary jurisdictions,” much less defined what the term means.
The federal government argued that the preliminary injunction and lawsuit should be tossed in the wake of a May 22 memorandum from U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions asserting the executive order only would be used to withhold a handful of small grants.
Orrick, however, found the memorandum inconsistent with the directives of the order and “functionally an ‘illusory promise’ to enforce the executive order narrowly.” He concluded the memo did not resolve the county’s claims the order violates the separation of powers, the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause and the Tenth Amendment.
In his April 25 ruling granting the county’s request for the preliminary injunction, the judge said Santa Clara County and co-plaintiff San Francisco had proved “they will suffer irreparable harm absent an injunction, and that the balance of harms and public interest weigh in their favor.”
The county will, for now, retain $1.7 billion in federal funding previously at stake under the executive order, which Santa Clara County officials said covers critical health and social services.
In the Bay Area, sanctuary counties include San Francisco, Santa Cruz and Alameda as well as cities such as Oakland and San Jose. Though many local jurisdictions have never officially designated themselves “sanctuaries,” they have said they will not cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement requirements that they turn over undocumented immigrants in their jail.
“Today’s decision strongly reaffirms that President Trump’s ‘sanctuary jurisdiction’ executive order is unconstitutional at its very core,” said Santa Clara County Counsel James Williams.
Staff writer Tatiana Sanchez contributed to this report. Contact Jason Green at 408-920-5006.
“Once again, the District Court has sent a message to President Trump that he cannot use the threat of withholding funds to coerce local governments into becoming federal immigration operatives — an unconstitutional effort that puts at risk vital services for millions of people across the country.” — Dave Cortese, Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors president