News
August 24, 2025
Judge blocks Trump from cutting funds to 34 more sanctuary cities
WASHINGTON >> A federal judge on Friday vastly expanded the scope of an order blocking the Trump administration from pulling federal funding for cities across the country over their policies that limit local law enforcement participation in immigration enforcement.
A federal judge has significantly broadened an existing order, preventing the Trump administration from withholding federal funds from 34 additional cities that have so-called "sanctuary" policies. The ruling, issued Friday, marks a major victory for these cities, which limit the extent to which local police cooperate with federal immigration enforcement efforts.
The original order, already in place, prohibited the administration from defunding several jurisdictions. This new decision expands that protection to include a much wider range of cities across the nation. These cities often have policies that prevent local law enforcement from inquiring about a person's immigration status or detaining them solely on that basis. Supporters of these policies argue they foster trust between immigrant communities and local police, encouraging cooperation in solving crimes and ensuring public safety for everyone.
The Trump administration has long argued that these sanctuary policies hinder federal immigration enforcement and endanger the public. They claim that by refusing to fully cooperate with federal authorities, these cities allow dangerous criminals to remain free, posing a threat to national security and overall community well-being. The administration has sought to pressure these jurisdictions into changing their policies by threatening to withhold federal funding, a move that could severely impact city budgets and essential services.
The judge's decision effectively blocks the administration from taking such punitive measures against the 34 newly protected cities. While the specific reasoning behind the expansion hasn't been fully detailed, it's likely based on legal arguments that the administration's actions exceed its authority or violate the cities' constitutional rights. The legal battles surrounding sanctuary cities and federal funding are expected to continue, with the administration likely to appeal the decision. The outcome of these legal challenges will have significant implications for the relationship between the federal government and local jurisdictions regarding immigration enforcement. This ruling underscores the ongoing tensions and legal complexities surrounding immigration policy in the United States.
The original order, already in place, prohibited the administration from defunding several jurisdictions. This new decision expands that protection to include a much wider range of cities across the nation. These cities often have policies that prevent local law enforcement from inquiring about a person's immigration status or detaining them solely on that basis. Supporters of these policies argue they foster trust between immigrant communities and local police, encouraging cooperation in solving crimes and ensuring public safety for everyone.
The Trump administration has long argued that these sanctuary policies hinder federal immigration enforcement and endanger the public. They claim that by refusing to fully cooperate with federal authorities, these cities allow dangerous criminals to remain free, posing a threat to national security and overall community well-being. The administration has sought to pressure these jurisdictions into changing their policies by threatening to withhold federal funding, a move that could severely impact city budgets and essential services.
The judge's decision effectively blocks the administration from taking such punitive measures against the 34 newly protected cities. While the specific reasoning behind the expansion hasn't been fully detailed, it's likely based on legal arguments that the administration's actions exceed its authority or violate the cities' constitutional rights. The legal battles surrounding sanctuary cities and federal funding are expected to continue, with the administration likely to appeal the decision. The outcome of these legal challenges will have significant implications for the relationship between the federal government and local jurisdictions regarding immigration enforcement. This ruling underscores the ongoing tensions and legal complexities surrounding immigration policy in the United States.
Category:
Politics