Federal Judge Rules That Trump's Sanctuary Cities Order Is "Clearly Unconstitutional"
"Given the nationwide scope of the Order, and its apparent constitutional flaws, a nationwide injunction is appropriate."
Chris Geidner Posted on April 25, 2017, at 1:37 p.m.
A federal judge on Tuesday barred the Trump administration from enforcing part of President Trump's January executive order that took aim at sanctuary cities — concluding that a challenged provision is "clearly unconstitutional."
US District Judge William H. Orrick issued a nationwide preliminary injunction — sought by San Francisco and Santa Clara counties in California — against enforcement of Section 9(a) of the January 25, 2017, executive order.
The section of the order purported to give Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly broad authority to deny funds to cities that "refuse to comply" with a law that requires cooperation between state and local governments and federal immigration authorities.
"[T]he Order has caused budget uncertainty by threatening to deprive the Counties of hundreds of millions of dollars in federal grants that support core services in their jurisdictions," Orrick wrote.
Although the Justice Department argued a narrow interpretation of what the executive order authorized, Orrick pointed to the president's own words — Trump called the order "a weapon" to fight cities that opposed his immigration policies — in concluding that the narrow reading "is not legally plausible."
Later, addressing the scope of the injunction, he wrote, "Given the nationwide scope of the Order, and its apparent constitutional flaws, a nationwide injunction is appropriate."
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.