Donald Trump’s words keep getting in the way of his efforts to tighten the nation’s borders.
A federal judge on Wednesday halted enforcement of a presidential order that would have authorized the White House to cut off funds to cities that refuse to cooperate with enforcement of federal immigration laws.
The power to spend belongs to Congress and not to the president, said District Judge William Orrick in San Francisco, who ruled that a Jan. 25 order by the administration that authorizes defunding of so-called sanctuary cities contravenes the Constitution’s separation of powers.
Though government lawyers asserted in court that the order does not give the president authority to impose new conditions on federal grants, Orrick noted statements by the president in February, when he told former Fox News host Bill O’Reilly that the threat of defunding “would be a weapon” to use against cities that decline to honor requests by the federal government to hold inmates in local jails for up to two days after their scheduled release so that immigration officials can determine if they want to take the person into custody.
Orrick also noted remarks by Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who told reporters that the death of Kate Steinle, a San Francisco woman who allegedly was killed by an undocumented immigrant, occurred because the assailant “admitted the only reason he came to San Francisco was because it was a sanctuary city.”
“If there was doubt about the scope of the order, the president and attorney general have erased it with their comments,” wrote Orrick, who also cited comments by White House press secretary Sean Spicer that the order aimed “to get cities into compliance” with executive action.
The injunction, which applies nationwide, follows a series of rulings by federal judges that blocked enforcement of a presidential ban on travel to the U.S. by people from six predominantly Muslim countries. Judges in those cases cited public comments by the president and his surrogates that the White House sought to ban entry of Muslims into the U.S. in violation of the Constitution.
Today's ruling confirms that feds can't defund cities across the nation due to immigration policies. #sanctuarycities #SF #SFStandsAsOne pic.twitter.com/Fwjbxcsz8k
— Mayor Ed Lee (@mayoredlee) April 25, 2017
Floyd Abrams, the First Amendment lawyer who successfully defended The New York Times against efforts by the Nixon administration to stop the paper from publishing the Pentagon Papers, recently told the Times that Trump’s tweets also may provide evidence in court for claims that a possible federal prosecution of WikiLeaks would represent an effort to use the legal system to punish journalists.
The ruling by Orrick addresses accusations by the cities and counties of Santa Clara and San Francisco, which each charged that the potential for losing federal grants as result of their policies would force them to cut critical services and entitlements.
San Francisco estimated it stands to lose about $1.2 billion, or about 12.5% of its annual budget, if the White House defunded the city and county. Santa Clara said that federal funds constitute about 35% of its annual revenues.
Because the executive order fails to clarify what conduct might cause a locality to lose funds, the directive also violates the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process clause, which requires that laws lay out the conduct they prohibit, Orrick said.