Judge Issues Injunction To Prevent Trump From Cutting Funding To Sanctuary Cities

A federal judge in California has officially blocked the Trump administration from cutting off federal funds to sanctuary cities.

Key Takeaways

US District Judge William Orrick issued an injunction preventing the Trump administration from withholding federal funds from sanctuary jurisdictions.
The lawsuit was led by San Francisco and joined by more than a dozen other cities and counties across the country.
This ruling echoes similar legal challenges from Trump’s first term when courts ruled he exceeded his authority on sanctuary city funding.
Justice Department attorneys argued the case was premature as no specific actions to withhold funds had yet been taken.
The administration has filed lawsuits against Illinois, Chicago, and New York over their sanctuary laws.

Judge Blocks Funding Cuts in Familiar Legal Battle

US District Judge William Orrick issued a nationwide injunction blocking the Trump administration from denying federal funding to sanctuary jurisdictions, marking the latest development in an ongoing immigration enforcement dispute. The ruling came in response to a lawsuit filed by San Francisco and more than a dozen other municipalities that limit their cooperation with federal immigration authorities. Judge Orrick, who was appointed by former President Obama, noted the familiar nature of the case, stating, “Here we are again,” as he delivered his decision, referencing similar challenges during Trump’s first term.

The injunction specifically prohibits the administration “from directly or indirectly taking any action to withhold, freeze, or condition federal funds” to sanctuary jurisdictions and requires written notice of the order to all federal departments and agencies. This sweeping protection covers cities and counties that have policies limiting local law enforcement cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The judge determined that the administration’s approach posed substantial constitutional concerns regarding separation of powers and states’ rights under the 10th Amendment.

Judge blocks Trump administration from withholding federal funds from 16 'sanctuary' cities, counties

— NewsWire (@NewsWire_US) April 24, 2025

Administration’s Arguments and Judicial Response

Justice Department lawyers maintained during proceedings that the lawsuit was premature, arguing that no specific actions had yet been taken to withhold funds from the plaintiff jurisdictions. However, Judge Orrick dismissed this reasoning, saying that the administration’s position was “essentially the same argument” presented during similar disputes in Trump’s first term. He further stated that sanctuary jurisdictions now faced even stronger concerns about enforcement actions than they did in 2017, when Trump’s previous attempts to restrict funding were also blocked.

“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,” wrote Judge Orrick in his ruling.

The legal battle mirrors previous confrontations between the Trump administration and sanctuary jurisdictions. In an earlier case, the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals previously ruled that Trump had exceeded his authority by attempting to impose conditions on federal grants not authorized by Congress. This pattern of judicial checks has consistently limited the administration’s ability to financially penalize jurisdictions that resist federal immigration enforcement priorities.

Nationwide Impact and Additional Perspectives

The lawsuit includes plaintiffs from across the nation, including Seattle, Portland, Minneapolis, St. Paul, New Haven, and Santa Fe, demonstrating the widespread nature of sanctuary policies. Rochester, New York, which has been a sanctuary city since 1986, exemplifies the local tensions these policies can create. A controversial incident there involved Rochester Police Department officers assisting Border Patrol agents during a traffic stop, which Police Chief David Smith later said violated city policy.

While sanctuary jurisdictions maintain that their policies enhance community safety by building trust with immigrant populations and focusing local resources on local crime, critics disagree. New York State Senate Minority Leader Rob Ortt has criticized sanctuary policies, arguing they improperly circumvent federal immigration law. The Trump administration has argued these policies are attempts to “abet so-called ‘sanctuary’ policies that seek to shield illegal aliens from deportation.”

This injunction comes amid a broader legal offensive by the administration against sanctuary laws. Just one day before this ruling, the Department of Justice sued Illinois and Chicago over their sanctuary laws, and has also challenged New York’s law restricting the sharing of vehicle and address information with federal immigration authorities. These parallel legal battles highlight the administration’s approach to addressing obstacles to its national immigration enforcement priorities.