On March 4, 2021, the Biden administration requested that the Supreme Court dismiss three pending appeals about Trump’s efforts to withhold law enforcement funds from cities and states that refused to cooperate with immigration authorities during the Trump administration.
The Supreme Court dismissed the cases.
Lawyers for the jurisdictions challenging Trump’s order to withhold funds agreed that the cases, which involved New York City, San Francisco, and several states including New York and California, should be dismissed.
President Biden rescinded Trump’s 2017 executive order that required U.S. agencies to withhold funds from the “sanctuary” jurisdictions. Lower courts had been divided on the legality of the policy. Trump’s order put conditions on the receipt of federal funds, requiring the bodies in question to give U.S. immigration officials access to their jails and advance notice when illegal immigrants were being released from custody.
San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera said, “We’re glad this issue has finally been put to rest. Federal officials can do their job in San Francisco, just like anywhere else in the country. But we were not about to let our police, firefighters and nurses be commandeered and turned into the Trump administration’s deportation force.”
The money at stake for San Francisco was about $1.4 million annually in federal funds, according to the city attorney’s office.
New York State Attorney General Letitia James said, “Local law enforcements’ ability to protect their jurisdictions should never be compromised to push an anti-immigrant agenda.” James added, “We look forward to continuing to work with the administration to ensure state and localities never have to choose between protecting their autonomy and protecting the public’s safety.”
The Trump administration provoked several legal challenges since 2017, advising that Justice Assistance Grants would be refused if local governments would not inform immigration agents at their request about the scheduled release of any person in custody “believed to be an alien,” sharing immigration status info with federal authorities, and allowing access to local jails to immigration officials.
Cities that limited cooperation with immigration authorities, like New York and San Francisco, were targeted by Trump administration policies. The Trump administration claimed the sanctuary cities were tolerating the presence of noncitizens who had committed crimes and were a public danger. These “sanctuary cities” believe that their limited cooperation with the immigration authorities improves public safety and increases trust between immigrant communities and the police.
The Trump administration imposed other measures on the sanctuary cities and used other tactics to try to coerce them into line with Trump’s policies. One of these measures was to bar New York residents from enrolling in Global Entry and other “trusted traveler” programs last year. Last April, while states were battling the pandemic, Trump suggested he would withhold aid to cities that limited their cooperation with immigration authorities.
New York Attorney General James said, “We’re pleased that despite the Trump administration’s attempts to exact revenge on cities and states through vindictive policies and continued litigation that we were able to work with the Biden administration to dismiss this case in the Supreme Court.”
The Department of Homeland Security implemented a series of Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) in January 2019. Under those orders, most often known as ex-President Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” program, “certain non-Mexican nationals arriving by land from Mexico were returned to Mexico to await the results of their removal proceedings.” These aspiring immigrants,... Read More »
The Trump administration had issued a rule that penalized lawful immigrants for seeking public assistance. Last week, the Supreme Court dismissed several pending appeals over that rule pursuant to joint requests filed by the Biden administration and plaintiffs that challenged that policy. Acting Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar told the justices... Read More »
In his next steps in changing course from the previous administration's immigration policies, President Biden has asked the Supreme Court to cancel arguments on two cases filed against the Trump administration's immigration policies. The cases tackle President Trump's construction of the border wall and his “Remain in Mexico” asylum program.... Read More »
From the beginning of his 2016 presidential campaign, Donald Trump’s tough immigration stance was a pillar of his candidacy and later, his presidency. The Republican nominee highlighted tragedies caused by illegal immigrants who broke the law and left Americans dead in their wake. The villains, according to then-candidate and now... Read More »
