Sixteen sanctuary cities sued the Trump Administration over federal funds being withheld if they continue to refuse to work with ICE. Yesterday, yet another federal judge ruled against Trump stating that the federal fund spigot must keep flowing.

A federal judge on Thursday blocked Donald Trump’s administration from withholding federal funding from more than a dozen so-called sanctuary jurisdictions that have declined to cooperate with the Republican president’s hardline immigration crackdown.

U.S. District Judge William Orrick in San Francisco issued the injunction at the request of 16 cities and counties nationally. San Francisco, which led the lawsuit, in its complaint filed in February argued that the Trump administration was unlawfully trying to force local officials to cooperate with federal immigration arrests.

The jurisdictions include the cities of Minneapolis; New Haven, Connecticut; Portland, Oregon; St. Paul, Minnesota; Santa Fe, New Mexico; and Seattle, which have laws and policies that limit or prevent local law enforcement from assisting federal officers with civil immigration arrests.

Sanctuary cities are all in on protecting those here illegally. EVEN IF said illegal then commits other crimes. They’d rather protect the criminal instead of the victim. 

But they ALSO really like that sweet sweet federal money. President Trump, rightly so in my opinion, issued an executive order yanking funds if those cities refuse to cooperate with the feds. Thus the lawsuit that we are now discussing. 

As is noted here, the cities attorneys were going to use various Constitutional clauses to make their case. 

Precedent in the Ninth Circuit and the orders of this court show why the Cities and
Counties have established that they are likely to prevail on the merits of at least their separation of powers, Spending Clause, and Fifth and Tenth Amendment claims. The challenged sections in the 2025 Executive Orders and the Bondi Directive that order executive agencies to withhold, freeze, or condition federal funding apportioned to localities by Congress, violate the Constitution’s separation of powers principles and the Spending Clause, as explained by the Ninth Circuit in the earlier iteration of this case in 2018; they also violate the Fifth Amendment to the extent they are unconstitutionally vague and violate due process. See City & Cnty. of S.F. v. Trump, 897 F.3d 1225, 1234– 35 (9th Cir. 2018); Cnty. of Santa Clara v. Trump, et al., 250 F. Supp. 3d 497, 530–32, 534–36 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 25, 2017). The 2025 Executive Orders’ directives to withhold or freeze federal funding to sanctuary jurisdictions also violate the Tenth Amendment because they impose coercive condition intended to commandeer local officials into enforcing federal immigration practices and law. See Cnty. of Santa Clara, 250 F. Supp. 3d at 533. And as the order that will follow this one makes plain, the Cities and Counties have also shown a likelihood of success on the merits of their Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) claim: the Bondi Directive’s order to freeze all DOJ funds is likely arbitrary and capricious, contrary to the Constitution and an ultra vires final agency action under the APA. 5 U.S.C. § 706(2).

To be honest, I can see where some of the case brought by the cities has Constitutional merit. HOWEVER, in some cases we are talking about criminals who are involved in the known transnational gangs of MS-13 and Tren de Aragua. In my opinion, it’s in the best interests of the safety and the security of those cities if they hand those guys over. 

Those advocating for illegals over Americans, such as Maryland’s Chris Van Hollen, have to be thrilled at this new ruling. 

Here’s just two exhibits as to why sanctuary cities are getting to be more dangerous for American citizens. 

This “Pomona father” is a previously deported illegal alien who returned to the U.S., which is a felony under 8 USC 1326 (illegal re-entry after removal).

The “day laborers” targeted had charges for child abuse, assault with a deadly weapon, DUI, and immigration violations. https://t.co/RK79wtcylV

— Bill Melugin (@BillMelugin_) April 24, 2025

There’s a great deal in common with many of those arrested. One, they’ve committed other crimes. Two, they’ve either been deported before or have had orders for their deportation and they still commit crimes. 

The New York Times conveniently glossed over that this illegal alien, Nascimento Blair is a convicted kidnapper and was sentenced to 15 years in prison.

In 2008, he was issued a final order of removal. Because of the Biden administration’s open border policies, this criminal… pic.twitter.com/qy3PvxBI2P

— Tricia McLaughlin (@TriciaOhio) April 24, 2025

Sanctuary cities ARE a problem in this country. Especially when they chose non-citizens over their own. And no, the argument that the loss of funding would cause OTHER problems doesn’t hold weight with me.

In the filing, the plaintiffs said that restrictions on Justice Department grants, outlined in a Feb. 5 memo from Attorney General Pam Bondi, could lead to the defunding and elimination of a wide range of public safety initiatives. Among them are programs to assist victims of rape, combat carjackings and provide forensic analysis for criminal investigations.

In siding with the plaintiffs, Orrick also agreed that the “threat to withhold funding causes them irreparable injury in the form of budgetary uncertainty, deprivation of constitutional rights, and undermining trust between the Cities and Counties and the communities they serve.”

For many cities, carjackings are on the rise. If law enforcement resources weren’t spread so thin BECAUSE of the city’s status.. Further, do you know who has been permanently deprived of their Constitutional Rights? Rachel Morin, Laken Riley, Jocelyn Nungaray and too many others. 

Illegal aliens get the due process they deserve, which is a hearing and then an order of deportation. If one is here illegally and commits an additional crime, then deportation absolutely should be the order of the day. Or permanent jail. 

If I read the words
"A District Court Judge has blocked"
One more time
I will be petitioning my government for the redress of grievances in some very creative ways pic.twitter.com/7GKSDh2GRh

— Jim Hanson (@JimHansonDC) April 24, 2025

Sanctuary cities have chosen to put American citizens last, thus THEIR Constitutional rights and their safety and security is at risk. In my opinion, that makes the case to yank the federal funds ASAP, judge or no judge. 

Feature Photo Credit: Lady Justice with US funds via iStock, cropped and modified