Legal battles impede Donald Trump’s attempt to cut federal funding for so-called ‘sanctuary cities’

Courts across the country have held back President Donald Trump's attempts to withhold federal funding for states and local jurisdictions that limit their cooperation with federal immigration authorities, so-called "sanctuary cities."

There is no official definition or list of sanctuary cities, and some cities  have pushed back on that label. There also isn't a one-size-fits-all sanctuary policy. Broadly, jurisdictions are described as sanctuary cities when they have policies that restrict state or local police from assisting federal immigration officers; stop local or state officials from inquiring into a person's immigration status; or restrict information sharing between local or state law enforcement and federal authorities.

Trump in 2017 signed an executive order instructing the attorney general to identify cities that did not comply with Section 1373 of federal law, which says local officials may not prohibit or restrict the exchange of information with federal immigration officers regarding the immigration status of any individual. Jurisdictions that refuse to comply with Section 1373 should not be eligible for federal grants, Trump's order said. Then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions said jurisdictions had to certify compliance with Section 1373 in order to receive funds from the Justice Department, particularly grants under the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program.

But cities sued the Trump administration over both the constitutionality of the executive order and the conditions set by the Justice Department. A May 2019 report from the Congressional Research Service said courts that had reviewed the legal challenges generally agreed that Trump acted unconstitutionally. Cities, counties and states suing the administration mainly argued that the executive order and grant conditions violated principles on separation of powers and the anti-commandeering doctrine (which says states can't be forced to carry out federal duties), the report said.

About a dozen lawsuits have been brought against the Trump administration, and it has lost nearly all of them at both the district and circuit level courts, said Lena Graber, senior staff attorney at the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, which advocates for immigrant rights.

Overall, the Justice Department has not been successful in withholding federal funds for so-called sanctuary cities, Graber told PolitiFact.

Court orders have required the Trump administration to disburse many of the grants that were withheld, Graber said.

The Justice Department did not respond to our queries asking which, if any, jurisdictions had been denied federal funding due to their sanctuary policies.

Graber said the Justice Department changes the rules of the grants every year in response to the lawsuits and court orders, "because their efforts have largely been struck down by the courts."

The Trump administration also has not attempted to cut all federal funds to so-called sanctuary cities, focusing instead on certain Justice Department grants, Graber noted.

The U.S. Supreme Court in June refused a request from the Trump administration to review a case challenging a California law that restricts police cooperation with federal immigration authorities. The court's refusal means the California law stands.

Trump's promise to cancel all funding of sanctuary cities hasn't been advanced by Congress, either. A related bill passed the House in 2017, with Republican support and Democratic opposition. It did not become a law. Democrats won control of the House in the 2018 midterm elections.

Trump promised that jurisdictions that refuse to cooperate with federal authorities would not receive taxpayer dollars. His efforts have been limited to Justice Department funds, and even those attempts have been thwarted by courts.

Trump's promise has not been fulfilled. We rate this a Promise Broken.