Judge finds Trump’s 'sanctuary city' order likely unconstitutional 

A federal judge on Thursday ruled that President Trump’s executive order that seeks to crack down on “sanctuary cities” is likely unconstitutional, blocking the administration from enforcing it against 16 cities and counties that sued. U.S. District Judge William Orrick said Trump’s order mirrors one he issued during his first term, which Orrick at the...

Apr 24, 2025 - 18:20
 0
Judge finds Trump’s 'sanctuary city' order likely unconstitutional 

A federal judge on Thursday ruled that President Trump’s executive order that seeks to crack down on “sanctuary cities” is likely unconstitutional, blocking the administration from enforcing it against 16 cities and counties that sued. 

U.S. District Judge William Orrick said Trump’s order mirrors one he issued during his first term, which Orrick at the time had similarly invalidated.

“Here we are again,” wrote Orrick, an appointee of former President Obama who serves in San Francisco. 

The judge’s order blocks the administration from enforcing Trump’s order against various jurisdictions in California that are suing: Monterey County and the cities of Emeryville, Oakland, Sacramento, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose, Santa Clara and Santa Cruz. 

It also extends to King County, Wash.; Minneapolis, Minn.; New Haven, Conn.; Portland, Ore.; St. Paul, Minn.; Santa Fe, N.M.; and Seattle. 

Signed on his first day in office as part of a broader executive order, Trump directed Attorney General Pam Bondi and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to ensure that “sanctuary” jurisdictions “do not receive access to federal funds.” 

The judge’s ruling blocks that provision and Bondi’s subsequent memo that defines a sanctuary city as the litigation proceeds. 

Orrick ruled that the counties and cities are likely to succeed on their claims that Trump’s order usurps Congress’s power of the purse, is unconstitutionally vague in violation of the Fifth Amendment and runs afoul of the 10th Amendment by commandeering local officials into enforcing federal immigration law. 

The Justice Department contended the jurisdictions lacked legal standing and their claims weren’t ripe because the cities haven’t yet lost any funds. 

“The Cities and Counties have pre-enforcement standing just as San Francisco and Santa Clara did in 2017,” the judge wrote, also pointing to how the Trump administration has taken legal action against Illinois and New York.

The Hill has reached out to the Justice Department for comment.