Judge permanently blocks Trump order that cut funding to sanctuary cities

Chicago Tribune ^ | Nov. 20, 2017 | AP

[Innovative]

A federal judge on Monday permanently blocked President Donald Trump's executive order to cut funding from cities that limit cooperation with U.S. immigration authorities.

U.S. District Court Judge William Orrick rejected the administration's argument that the executive order applies only to a relatively small pot of money and said Trump cannot set new conditions on spending approved by Congress.

[spacewarp]

What would happen if he just said “Your ‘Honor’, when you find an army to force this to stop, then fine, in the mean time, no federal agency will be allowed to spend one single cent in any sanctuary city. No federal agency will be allowed to provide any assistance to any sanctuary city. No federal agency will be allowed to operate in any sanctuary city. We will withdraw from every sanctuary city in the country to ensure than there are no cities who are overriding federal law. In the mean time, you can pound sand.”

[qaz123]

I think I have a pretty good understanding of civics and how our government, as dysfunctional as it is, is supposed to work. But, I will say that I am by no means a PoliSci, Government, or Civics professor or SME.

That being said, what gives the judge the authority to do that? The giving the money to the cities is an administrative issue that is done thru the DOJ or DHS, I would think, in this case. If so, what jurisdiction does the judge have on an administrative issue? If Congress passes a law and someone challenged the law, then I’d understand it. But, that isn’t happening here, so where does their authority come from?

[qaz123]

If the 17th Amendment were repealed, as it should be, there’d be 2/3rds.

[chuckee]

Take it to Congress and let the Dem legislators vote on the record that they are in favor of sanctuary cities and illegally protecting illegal immigrants.