Almost immediately after taking office in January, President Trump issued one of his first Executive Orders to restrict the prevalence of sanctuary cities. The order restricted the funding available to cities that had declared themselves ‘sanctuary cities.’ It also expanded the ability of federal law enforcement such as Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol to do their job. This included doing their job in cities that had declared themselves ‘sanctuary cities’ and had devoted themselves to protecting people who have broken the law.
This order received a warm reception by ICE and Border Patrol officials who are happy to finally be able to do their jobs. However, among the left, it has garnered a lot of resentment.
This resentment led the cities of San Francisco and Santa Clara, liberal havens, to file lawsuits against the federal government in April. U.S. District Judge William Orrick ruled in favor of the cities, blocking the executive order. The case was brought before the court again this month and the same judge refused to reinstate the order.
This case was brought back up because of Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ memo issued in May. The memo was written:
“Telling officials to follow a narrow interpretation of the executive order, and said jurisdictions that did not match his definition would not receive grants from the Justice Department or Homeland Security.”
Sessions argues that because the funding cuts only applies to funding from the Justice and Homeland Security Departments, and it only affects cities that choose to ignore federal immigration law, it is a valid executive order. So Trump passed a narrowly tailored executive order that only effected some funding to cities that willingly harbor criminals and a judge thinks that cities will succeed in challenging it? Maybe the 9th Circuit isn’t the only California court that is too political.
The Judge Orrick refused to reinstate the executive order because the memo from Sessions did not:
“Impact my prior conclusions that the Counties have standing, that their claims against the Executive Order are ripe, and that they are likely to succeed on the merits of those claims.”
This Judge’s defiance comes roughly a month after the Supreme Court overturned the 9th Circuit Court’s (also out of California) ruling against the Trump travel ban. The overturned that decision 9-0.
Liberal judges from California need to learn that they are too political to make fair decisions. Even Ruth Bader Ginsburg finds California judges too political.