Thomas Breen photo
Mayor Elicker, fundraising off of fed court injunction: "This victory is a sign that our efforts are working."
A federal judge in California ruled that the Trump administration can’t withhold funds from New Haven, San Francisco, and a dozen other cities just because they are “sanctuary jurisdictions” that limit local cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.
Judge William Orrick of the U.S. District Court of Northern California handed down that six-page preliminary injunction Thursday in the ongoing federal case City and County of San Francisco v. Donald J. Trump.
Orrick’s order states that the defendants — including President Trump, U.S. Attorney General Pamela Bondi, and U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, among others — are “hereby restrained and enjoined from directly or indirectly taking any action to withhold, freeze, or condition federal funds” from the plaintiff cities just because they limit local cooperation with various immigration enforcement orders.
The judge’s preliminary injunction essentially invalidates, for now, a handful of Trump’s executive orders — including these two – as well as a Feb. 5 directive from the attorney general insofar as they attempt to financially punish municipalities for not proactively assisting the federal government’s immigration enforcement efforts.
Click here to read the judge’s order in full.
New Haven was one of the first five local governments to sign on to this lawsuit against the Trump administration in early February. There are now a total of 16 plaintiffs, most of which are West Coast cities. They include the California cities of San Francisco, Santa Clara, Oakland, Emeryville, San Jose, San Diego, Sacramento, Santa Cruz, and Monterey. They also include New Haven; Seattle; Minneapolis; St. Paul; Santa Fe; Portland, Oregon; and King County, Washington.
The lawsuit challenges the Trump administration’s executive orders on the grounds that they attempt to“commandeer” city workers to assist in federal immigration enforcement in violation of the 10th Amendment. Defenders of the Trump administration’s orders centralizing power with the presidency have promoted the so-called“unitary executive theory,” which interprets the Constitution in such a way to bolster the president’s control over the shape, administration, and direction of government.
New Haven operates under a “Welcoming City” executive order that Mayor Justin Elicker signed in 2020. That order prohibits city employees from inquiring about someone’s immigration status, disclosing confidential information, or using city resources to assist in an investigation unless compelled by state or federal law. The city also does not coordinate with federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents (ICE). In preparation for the Trump administration, all city employees were retrained on the order.
Per Judge Orrick’s order, the Trump administration pushed back on the request for a preliminary injunction by New Haven, San Francisco, and the other municipalities. The administration argued that the executive orders in question “merely provide guidance for executive agencies reviewing federal funding to sanctuary jurisdictions, and because the Cities and Counties have not yet suffered a loss of funds.”
This is the same argument that the Trump administration made in 2017 during a similar federal court case seeking to prevent the federal government from effectuating similar sanctuary-jurisdiction-punishing orders.
Orrick also heard that case — and also ruled for the municipalities and against the Trump administration, as he found “that the plaintiffs had a well-founded fear of enforcement’ of the orders in question.
Mayor Justin Elicker sent out an email press release Thursday and a reelection campaign fundraising email Friday, celebrating the court’s ruling as a victory for New Haven.
“We need to make sure our police department is working to fight crime and not commandeered to do the work of the federal government,” he is quoted as saying in Thursday’s press release. “We are very pleased with this ruling and that New Haven will be able to use lawfully obligated federal funds to further strengthen public safety in our city.”
And in Friday’s campaign email, Elicker wrote, “We were one of the first cities to sue Donald Trump this year, and yesterday we had a ground-shifting win.”
He continued: “I’ve said from the very beginning of this administration that I will do everything in my power to stand up and fight for New Haven residents when they come under threat. This victory is a sign that our efforts are working.”
According to Thursday’s press release, New Haven, Minneapolis, Portland, St. Paul, Santa Fe and Seattle are all being represented in this case by Public Rights Project, “a nonpartisan nonprofit that works with local governments to protect civil rights.”
“The law is clear: the federal government can’t coerce local law enforcement to do ICE’s job,” Public Rights Project Founder aned CEO Jill Habig is quoted as saying in Thursday’s press release. “The Trump administration’s attempt to destroy sanctuary cities by stripping funding is an illegal attack on public safety and local authority. We’re proud to stand alongside our government partners to defend their communities and policies that help people thrive.”
Elicker, a Democrat, is seeking a fourth two-year term as the city’s top elected official this municipal election year. He faces a challenge from Republican Steve Orosco, who has said he’s opposed to sanctuary city policies and disagrees with Elicker’s decision to sue the Trump administration on this matter.
