Judge blocks Donald Trump's executive order against sanctuary cities
A judge in San Francisco has blocked Donald Trump's executive order withholding funds from sanctuary cities that fail to comply with federal immigration demands....
5 Published By - independent - 2017.04.25. 20:17
http://usa.news.itthon.ma/news/judge...nctuary-cities
On what grounds?
Pending resolution of lawsuits that have been filed.
California judge blocks Trump order on sanctuary city money
By The Associated Press
April 25, 2017 4:15 pm
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A federal judge in San Francisco has blocked a Trump administration order to withhold funding from communities that limit cooperation with U.S. immigration authorities.
U.S. District Judge William Orrick issued the temporary ruling Tuesday in a lawsuit over the executive order targeting so-called sanctuary cities. The decision will stay in place while the lawsuit moves through court.
The Republican president’s administration and two California governments that sued over the order disagreed about its scope.
San Francisco and Santa Clara County argued that it threatened billions of dollars in federal funding.
But an attorney for the Justice Department, Chad Readler, said at a recent court hearing that it applied to a limited set of grants.
Readler said less than $1 million was at stake nationally and possibly no San Francisco funding.
http://wtop.com/government/2017/04/c...ry-city-money/
William Orrick III
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from William H. Orrick III)
William Horsley Orrick III https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...ick%2C_III.jpg Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Incumbent Assumed office
May 16, 2013Appointed by Barack Obama Preceded by Charles R. Breyer Personal details Born William Horsley Orrick III
May 15, 1953 (age 63)
San Francisco, CaliforniaParents William Horsley Orrick, Jr. (father)
Marion Naffziger (mother)Education Yale University B.A.
Boston College Law School J.D.
William Horsley Orrick III (born May 15, 1953) is a United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. He formerly served as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Civil Division of the United States Department of Justice.
Apr 25 2017, 7:38 pm ET
Court Blunts Trump’s Sanctuary Cities Crackdown
by Pete Williams
A federal judge Tuesday blunted the impact of one of President Donald Trump's executive orders on immigration, forbidding the White House to withhold federal funds from sanctuary cities — local governments that limit police cooperation with federal immigration authorities.
Federal District Court Judge William Orrick issued a nationwide injunction in response to a lawsuit filed by San Francisco and nearby Santa Clara County. They argued that the president's January 25th executive order, declaring sanctuary cities ineligible to receive federal grants, was unconstitutional.
[Judge Blocks Trump Order to Cut Sanctuary City Funding]
Judge Blocks Trump Order to Cut Sanctuary City Funding 2:39
"The Constitution vests the spending power in Congress, not the President," the judge said. President Trump's executive order "cannot constitutionally place new conditions on federal funds."
San Francisco's city attorney, Dennis Herrera, applauded the judge's order. "This is why we have courts - to halt the overreach of a president and an attorney general who either don't understand the Constitution or chose to ignore it."
Related: San Francisco Seeks Ban on Trump 'Sanctuary Cities' Order
The Trump administration argued that the lawsuit was premature because the government hasn't yet taken steps to carry out the executive order. But the judge said the city and county were already feeling the effects of budget uncertainty caused by the administration's threat to withhold grants. Lawyers for San Francisco said the city could lose about $2 billion a year.
Tuesday's order covered a section of Mr. Trump's executive order titled "Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States." The challenged provision directed the attorney general to ensure that sanctuary cities "are not eligible to receive federal grants." It also directed the secretary of Homeland Security to designate local governments as sanctuary cities.
At the heart of the dispute are detainer requests, issued by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement or ICE, asking local police and sheriff's offices to hold jail inmates for up to 48 hours after they have completed serving their sentences. The requests apply to people in the US illegally who are convicted of committing local crimes and who are subject to deportation after they are released.
City ordinances prohibit San Francisco police from giving immigration authorities advance notice of an inmate's release from jail, even if the police know that ICE wants to detain that person.
Judge Orrick also said the executive order was unconstitutional because it imposed conditions on federal funds already issued or approved. And he said the president's action was too broad.
"Federal funding that bears no meaningful relationship to immigration enforcement cannot be threatened merely because a jurisdiction chooses an immigration enforcement strategy of which the president disapproves," the judge wrote.
Santa Clara Supervisor Cindy Chavez in a statement Tuesday said the Trump administration attempted an "end run" around the Constitution. Board of Supervisors President Dave Cortese said "The politics of fear emanating from the Trump White House has just suffered a major setback."
"The court's decision is a win for the neediest people in our nation. Seniors in need of food, foster youth in need of shelter and children who need medical care," Chavez said. "We'll continue being a welcoming, safe and diverse community."
Tuesday's order does not completely forbid the federal government to withhold grant money from uncooperative cities. An existing federal law says local governments cannot restrict law enforcement officials from sending information to the federal government about the citizenship status of any person.
The judge said his injunction "does not impact the government's ability to use lawful means to enforce existing conditions of federal grants," including obeying that law.
In a statement, the Justice Department said Tuesday's order upheld the government's ability to enforce existing conditions on federal grants and said it "will follow the law with respect to regulation of sanctuary jurisdictions." The statement said nothing about any plans to appeal Tuesday's ruling.
Similar lawsuits are pending in Washington, Massachusetts, and elsewhere in California.
New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio said in a statement Tuesday that the judge's order is another defeat for the Trump administration's policies on immigration.
"Once again a federal court has told the Trump administration: 'No you can't.' The president is going beyond his authority when he tries to cut vital funding to cities that don't share his illogical and unconstitutional desire to scapegoat immigrants," de Blasio, a Democrat, said.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/...ckdown-n750911
So the order doesn't stop what Trump is actually going to do which is cut law enforcement grants to cities that aren't abiding US immigration law.
The court responded to snowflake hysteria. That's really sad to see happen in our federal courts. Our federal courts are losing the respect of the American People, and rightly so.
I'm so sick and tired of hearing illegal aliens referred to as "immigrants". They have no right being here.Quote:
"Once again a federal court has told the Trump administration: 'No you can't.' The president is going beyond his authority when he tries to cut vital funding to cities that don't share his illogical and unconstitutional desire to scapegoat immigrants," de Blasio, a Democrat, said.
That's why their legal term is illegal aliens, not illegal immigrants. An immigrant is an alien who comes here legally, an illegal alien is an alien who comes here or stays here illegally.
Well I sure hope so. We need to start turning the screws on these sanctuary cities.Quote:
Originally Posted by Judy
This was a blow-hard ruling for the drug cartel financed snowflakes against something that wasn't even happening, it's called "anticipatory", and in all other legal venues, anticipatory lawsuits are illegal and are thrown out of court. In other words, you can't file a lawsuit because you "anticipate" some wrong-doing, you file a lawsuit for an actual wrong-doing. It's such an in-judicial judicial ruling, it's almost laughable, they did it for the press coverage to try to humiliate our President, our laws and the American people.
I am sick of it too, Scott. How is a criminal who broke the law by crossing our border illegally an immigrant? The moment they crossed our border illegally, automatically made them a criminal. How do they put criminals and people who have painstaking and legally gone through the legal process to obtain citizenship, in the same group? They must think we're stupid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott-in-FL