Judge Blocks Trump Administration From Punishing 'Sanctuary Cities' : The Two
Judge Blocks Trump Administration From Punishing 'Sanctuary Cities'
 The Trump administration  cannot withhold federal money to punish local governments for  their  noncompliance with immigration authorities  according to a ruling by a federal judge in California.
In  an order announced Monday  Judge William Orrick permanently blocked the policy  issued as one of President Trump's earliest executive orders  ruling it was "unduly coercive" and violated the separation of powers.
The judge had previously issued a temporary injunction blocking  the policy   as did a judge in Chicago. " This order  plows no new ground " Orrick wrote â although this injunction  unlike the previous ones  is permanent.
In the controversial executive order  signed in January   Trump  sought to deny federal funds to so-called "sanctuary cities." Those are jurisdictions that refuse to share some information with federal immigration officials  as a way to partially protect some people who are in the country illegally.
 Trump 's order said such jurisdictions "are not eligible to receive Federal grants  except as deemed necessary for law enforcement purposes." In response  multiple jurisdictions sued the Justice Department  including the city of San Francisco and the county of Santa Clara.
The city and county alleged that  the executive order  was overbroad  unconstitutionally coercive and "void for vagueness."
The federal government maintained that a follow-up memo from the attorney general clarified  the policy  and limited  its  scope. In that memo  Jeff Sessions wrote that  the executive order  only applies to grants administered by the departments of Justice and Homeland Security  not all grants  and can't be applied in any way that would violate constitutional authority.
Judge William Orrick ruled against the federal government  writing that  the executive order  was "unconstitutionally broad" in  its  effect and evidently coercive. He noted that  Trump  has called  the executive order  a "weapon" to wield against cities.
And he rejected the idea that the attorney general's memo made  the executive order  constitutional.
Orrick called the memo an "illusory promise " a non-binding document with an "implausible interpretation" of the order  which "does not change the plain meaning" of  Trump 's words. Because  the order  "is unconstitutional on  its  face " the judge said  a nationwide injunction is "appropriate."
 [TGT] 
 [TGT] cannot withhold federal money to punish local governments for  their  noncompliance with immigration authorities  according to a ruling by a federal judge in California.
In  an order announced Monday  Judge William Orrick permanently blocked the policy  issued as one of  [TGT] 's earliest executive orders  ruling it was "unduly coercive" and violated the separation of powers.
The judge had previously issued a temporary injunction blocking  the policy   as did a judge in Chicago. " This order  plows no new ground " Orrick wrote â although this injunction  unlike the previous ones  is permanent.
In the controversial executive order  signed in January   Trump  sought to deny federal funds to so-called "sanctuary cities." Those are jurisdictions that refuse to share some information with federal immigration officials  as a way to partially protect some people who are in the country illegally.
  [TGT]  's order said such jurisdictions "are not eligible to receive Federal grants  except as deemed necessary for law enforcement purposes." In response  multiple jurisdictions sued the Justice Department  including the city of San Francisco and the county of Santa Clara.
The city and county alleged that  the executive order  was overbroad  unconstitutionally coercive and "void for vagueness."
The federal government maintained that a follow-up memo from the attorney general clarified  the policy  and limited  its  scope. In that memo  Jeff Sessions wrote that  the executive order  only applies to grants administered by the departments of Justice and Homeland Security  not all grants  and can't be applied in any way that would violate constitutional authority.
Judge William Orrick ruled against the federal government  writing that  the executive order  was "unconstitutionally broad" in  its  effect and evidently coercive. He noted that  Trump  has called  the executive order  a "weapon" to wield against cities.
And he rejected the idea that the attorney general's memo made  the executive order  constitutional.
Orrick called the memo an "illusory promise " a non-binding document with an "implausible interpretation" of the order  which "does not change the plain meaning" of  Trump 's words. Because  the order  "is unconstitutional on  its  face " the judge said  a nationwide injunction is "appropriate."