San Francisco Judge Blocks Trump's Sanctuary City Order

Tyler Durden's picture

To our complete 'shock,' a federal judge in San Francisco has just blocked Trump's Executive Order intended to withhold funding from communities that limit cooperation with U.S. immigration authorities.  The basis of the finding is that only Congress, not the president, has authority to attach new conditions to federal spending.

"The Constitution vests the spending powers in Congress, not the President, so the Order cannot constitutionally place new conditions on federal funds. Further, the Tenth Amendment requires that conditions on federal funds be unambiguous and timely made; that they  bear some relation to the funds at issue; and that the total financial incentive not be coercive. 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."

U.S. District Judge William Orrick, an Obama appointee, issued the temporary ruling moments ago after San Francisco and Santa Clara County argued that it threatened billions of dollars in federal funding. The decision will stay in place while the lawsuit moves through court.

Ironically, an attorney for the Justice Department, Chad Readler, downplayed the usefulness of the Executive Order admitting at a recent court hearing that it only applied to three Justice Department and Homeland Security Department grants that amounted to less than $1 million nationally and possibly no San Francisco funding at all. 

Meanwhile, for the first time we learn that the DOJ, at oral argument, also contended the sanctuary cities EO was toothless--merely an exercise of Trump's "bully pulpit" to "encourage communities and states to comply with the law."

But, Judge Orrick disagreed with the scope of the Executive Order saying that it attempts to "to reach all federal grants, not merely the three mentioned at the hearing."

It is heartening that the Government’s lawyers recognize that the Order cannot do more constitutionally than enforce existing law. But Section 9(a), 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. And if there was doubt about the scope of the Order, the President and Attorney General have erased it with their public comments. The President has called it “a weapon” to use against jurisdictions that disagree with his preferred policies of immigration enforcement, and his press secretary has reiterated that the President intends to ensure that “counties and other institutions that remain sanctuary cites don’t get federal government funding in compliance with the executive order.” The Attorney General has warned that  jurisdictions that do not comply with Section 1373 would suffer “withholding grants, termination of grants, and disbarment or ineligibility for future grants,” and the “claw back” of any funds previously awarded. Section 9(a) is not reasonably susceptible to the new, narrow interpretation offered at the hearing.

...and apparently Judge Orrick didn't think the DOJ's arguments were even "legally plausible."

So, if the DOJ believes that the scope of the Executive Order would only impact $1mm in federal funding and was "merely an exercise of Trump's 'bully pulpit', then we have to wonder whether the whole thing was just a charade to avoid more "flip-flopping" accusations?  What say you?

Here is the full order:

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
buckstopshere's picture

There was no sanctuary for American citizens under the Obama regime.

No sanctuary for all the American victims of illegal aliens.

Lumberjack's picture

No earthquake money for SF...

SomethingSomethingDarkSide's picture

This says to me: "buy a gun, cause we don't give a fuck about your safety"

macholatte's picture


Time to drain the DOJ Swamp on the west coast and get some lawyers in there who can adequately represent the laws of the land instead of representing the hate America communist agenda.


hedgeless_horseman's picture


Depending on how the Texas Supreme Court rules, cities may want to rethink being a Sanctuary City...


Ms. Johnson states in her ninth amended petition that her husband,

Officer Rodney Johnson (Officer Johnson), a 12-year veteran of the

Houston Police Department (HPD), was shot in the head and killed by Juan

Leonardo Quintero-Perez (Quintero), a foreign national that was illegally in

the United States, who Officer Johnson had placed in the back seat of his

patrol car after stopping him for speeding and discovering that he did not

have a valid driver’s license. (CR 43-44). The petition states that HPD

General Order No. 500-5 prohibits officers from calling Homeland Security

Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE) either as a private citizen or

while on duty. (CR 43). The petition goes on to state in relevant part:

By calling the ICE Federal database a person can be

informed if another is not illegally in the United States

and whether that person has a federal warrant

outstanding for having been previously deported making

that person’s re-entry a strict liability felony crime with a

minimum five years imprisonment in federal penitentiary.

(CR 44).


If Rodney Johnson had been allowed to telephone the ICE

database he would have discovered that Quintero was 

previously convicted of sexual assault, was previously

deported, and was possibly armed and dangerous.

Rodney Johnson was not allowed to ask a private citizen

or another HPD Officer that was off-duty to make such a

phone call because the HPD policy prevents this. Rodney

Johnson is also prohibited from asking the passengers

about Quintero’s legal status or gathering any information

related to another’s legal status whether while on duty or

as a private citizen. (CR 44).


[D]ue to the General Order 500-05 and other policies and

customs implementing it no one was able to ascertain that

Quintero had a federal warrant and should have been

arrested. (CR 45).


[T]he HPD officers never communicated with the federal

Department of Homeland Security or relevant federal

databases to determine whether Quintero had a federal

arrest warrant. During this time period, and continuing

to the present, the City of Houston and the Houston

Police Department maintained and practiced a policy,

procedure, and custom of prohibiting HPD officers from

inquiring into a suspect’s immigration status and from

communicating with the Department of Homeland

Security to determine the criminal status of detained

persons and whether a federal arrest warrant is pending.

This prohibition is part of Defendant’s “Sanctuary Policy”

in which the Defendant apparently defiantly disregards

and refuses to obey the laws and regulations of the United

States. (CR 45).

nuubee's picture

If by the judges decision a President cannot arbitrarily alter federal funding based on his own policy preferences, then that should invalidate a lot of Obamacare.

mofreedom's picture

ACA was written and passed with alot of open-ended crap for the blank to set the statutes.

I don't know about otherwise...though I can't imigine free shit to locales ever being at congress discretion...but I am not a black robe...holier than thou...shit don't stink...

NidStyles's picture

I want to know why there is no active check on these judges anymore...



J S Bach's picture

Isn't there any Constitutional scholar/lawyer on the side of right (both figuratively and literally) who can put these usurping pansies in robes in their place?  WTF... is the Constitution really THAT shredded?  I mean this is like a really bad movie... worse than "Plan 9 From Outer Space".

NidStyles's picture

Find me someone with the balls to take any of these people on, and I will show what is likely a homeless guy or someone that has been forced into working a shit job, because he is too honest or forthright.

wren's picture

Maybe it is time to FLOOD California with ICE agents. Maybe he cannot force them to enforce federal law, but if there are ZERO illegals left in California, then no problem.

Then watch as the D's turn into R's.

Waiting for the headline, "ICE agents arrest 242,000 illegal immigrants in Los Angeles, 162,000 in Sacramento, 381,000 in Sandiego, and 326,000 in San Francisco, overnight!"

Manthong's picture

‘gotta love them west coast faggots...

AVmaster's picture

But they are totally on board with trumps warmongering...

Shows the lefts priorities...


NewsFlash: Having illegals here could be a death sentence too you dipshits...

NidStyles's picture

"The Left" is code for low-IQ goyim.

winged's picture

Isn't Trump the child of an immigrant?

East Indian's picture

legal immgrant, I think.

Keyser's picture

Fuck the San Fran judge's order... Just don't pay the $$$ to sanctuary cities, what are they going to do, sue? Good luck with that... 

jerseychris's picture

Do the "slow walk", something the Dems are good at.

P-51 Stiletto's picture

Grandson. Screwhead, get your story straight.


brianshell's picture

No more mister nice guy. The funds withholding was a gentle political gesture to nudge reasonable leaders to acquiesce. Failing that, the actual law enforcement method is to arrest those leaders who order evasion of the law. That would mean Mayor Murray would be handcuffed and detained, for example. If local police intervened, Trump will order in the national guard.

Rabbi Chaim Cohen's picture

Meh... I don't think the EO was a very effective remedy anyway especially in California. Bring back E-verify and prosecute state and city OFFICIALS directly and directly fine them each $10K per instance when an illegal is found receiving public assistance in their jurisdiction (after a 3-6 month grace period). Do the same for each instance of flippant personal public criminal solicitation when they advocate for hiding/protecting illegals. All employers also get $10k fine per illegal in their employ. Hit them where it really hurts and the problem will go away. Especially when coupled with increased enforcement on the illegal aliens themselves.

Of course the weak economy will not appreciate losing all of it's cheap labor, but that is another story.

NidStyles's picture

The economy is weak because no one feels like working when it's just going to go into the pockets of a Jew Banker, or to benefit Israel or Zionists...


Who wants to work when you're essentially a slave for the a bunch of arrogant desert turds that can't even run their own country without billions a year in welfare payments? I honestly do not blame anyone, when it seems like nothing you do will get you ahead, but will keep them in power and getting wealthier... You will end up not having any real reason to go out of your way to do anything in a positive light. No reason to build anything great when it will just be stolen and your wealth crushed by a Jew banker. Don't bother speaking out against it either, because they will target you and ruin you.


This is the US as it sits today. We've been subverted by a bunch of Jewish terrorists.


This is the very definition of what degeneracy means. Their effect on our society is directly degenerate, it destroys the will to live of many of our people. They need to go live in their own country and stay out of our political offices. Anything less than a ban on Zionists and dual-citizens in political office is essentially treason.

philipat's picture

Perhaps a better strategy might be just to allow ALL the illegal aliens to flood into SF to the point there are only LGBT "minorities" and illegals. Then either let Baby Kim do his thing or let it just rot from within. Either way, problem solved....

Reality Creator's picture

Jamestown is why we need sanctuary cities bitchez.

autofixer's picture

I thought that was The whole Trump thing?

ThankUGartman's picture

Rufus Paul Harris tried. If you cannot afford an attorney for several months you're screwed. Perjury, not allowing evidence that proves innocence, harsh sentencing if found guilty, even bad guys with guns telling you not to show up to court the following day or your family will be killed In Trump's case he has the money but being castrated by a liberal Judge, where's the respect for the commancer in chief? 23 years for white collar crime n they couldn't prove he pocketedc

DanDaley's picture

Some judges need to be arrested for treason, and aiding and abetting a criminal enterprise (RICO - Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization, e.g, the Democrat Party)

Omen IV's picture

whether these Judges have a point to be made on the law or NOT - this is systematic regardless of the law





I put forth the proposition that the REPUBLICANS ARE WHORES TO THEIR BASE


meditate_vigorously's picture

The constitution was written for everyone to read, no special education required.

Tejano's picture

There has never been any. Nominated by el Presidente, confirmed by the senate, they serve their masters with a lifetime "tenure". They are not elected, they're  there as long as they please. The Judiciary Act of 1789 pretty much doomed the people to a plague of lawyers. All of whom, by the way, need to be strung up by the entrails of the bankers.

cheka's picture

pissant judge outranks president.  you've been skyped

welcome to palestine

soyungato's picture

To fight shit wth shit. That is the way to go. The DOJ should just do what you said by reversing all those Obama gave-aways. 

Don't hold your breath though, the Trump adminstration is such a fucking joke they cant even find the bathrooms in the white house, never mind taking a common sense approach to counter the liberal freaks.

847328_3527's picture

San Francisco's BART takeover robbery: 40 to 60 thugs swarm train, beat and rob innocent weekend riders and home-bound workers



If they keep voting for these left wing fanatics with ties to extremist groups like the DNC, this is what they reap.

doomchild's picture

This kind of shit, nobody will report on the news or talk about here for the fear of offending a certain protected class. 

Dennisen's picture

1800s Recipe for Corrupt Judges and Lawyers:
1. Large uprising of the affected populace
2. One small barrel hot tar
3. Three feather pillows, ripped open
4. One wooden rail

Remove individual from residence at night, forcibly if necessary. Tie hands and feet. Utilize threatening language. Apply ingredients liberally. Tie to rail. Carry individual out of town.

Current recipe for Said Judicial Characters:
1. Utilize blogs, podcasts, and other technology-based sources to grumble, sneer, and threaten.
2. Advance to next article or search YouTube for new entertainment.

doomchild's picture

my wife travels to work on that bart line. I fear for her safety. I try to tell her to be vigilant but trying to talk some sense into her is beyond me. 

Anon2017's picture

Have you thought about moving?

doomchild's picture

Yes Anon. I am working on that. Thanks for the concern. 

Xena fobe's picture

Bart riders should have fought back. 

NidStyles's picture

"Not my problem"


That's what they will tell you.

JamesinNM's picture

40 capped perps would be a beautiful sight.

in4mayshun's picture

Then SF would prosecute you for murder with special circumstances: hate crimes.

Chauncey Gardener's picture

This just pisses me off to no end. I used to work in downtown Oakland and never feared for my safety. Rode BART several times to A's games. WTF happened to the SF Bay Area?

Lumberjack's picture

Twice the price of Clinton: Obama to net $400K for Wall street speech

55 men's picture

Well thats only because they dont have to pay Hillary anymore ;)

847328_3527's picture

America is now a nation of men, not a nation of laws.


You don't like the law-----No Problem! Just shop around for a judge who agrees with your politics and for a few $$$$ get District Judge Activist in Podunckville to block the law.

booboo's picture

"The Constitution vests the spending powers in Congress, not the President, so the Order cannot constitutionally place new conditions on federal funds. Further, the Tenth Amendment requires that conditions on federal funds be unambiguous and timely made; that they  bear some relation to the funds at issue; and that the total financial incentive not be coercive."

The entire structure of .GOV stays in place precisely due to coercion 

does the dumb fucking judge think everyone just pays their fines out of the goodness of their heart?