Former President Donald Trump is using executive orders, potential litigation, federal funding cuts, and public pressure to target jurisdictions that limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. His administration has already taken several actions to implement this crackdown in 2025.
Executive and administrative
actions
- Executive Orders: On April 28, 2025,
Trump signed Executive Order 14287, directing the Departments of Justice
(DOJ) and Homeland Security (DHS) to pursue remedies against sanctuary
jurisdictions. A previous order was signed in February, setting the stage
for these actions.
- Designating and listing
jurisdictions: In August 2025, the DOJ published a list of states,
counties, and cities designated as sanctuary jurisdictions, based on
policies that "materially impede" federal immigration law
enforcement.
- Alerting jurisdictions: The DOJ and
DHS are formally notifying designated sanctuary jurisdictions of their
non-compliance, with a potential for legal action and federal funding cuts
if they do not revise their policies.
- Pressuring cooperation: The
administration is leveraging these designations to pressure jurisdictions
into signing agreements to cooperate with Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE). As of late September 2025, this has led to a memorandum
of understanding with Nevada and a policy change in Louisville, Kentucky.
- Increasing ICE activity: Federal
immigration agencies have reportedly surged deportation agents into some
sanctuary jurisdictions to increase enforcement actions.
- Expanding Section 287(g) agreements: The administration has issued an executive order to dramatically expand the 287(g) program, which deputizes local law enforcement to perform federal immigration functions. Some states like Texas have mandated that counties enter these agreements.
Legal and legislative
challenges
- Federal lawsuits: The administration
has filed lawsuits against cities and states, including Illinois, New
York, and Chicago, claiming their sanctuary policies violate the
Constitution's Supremacy Clause. Many of these lawsuits are still pending
in court.
- Threatening funding cuts: Executive
orders have directed federal agencies to identify funds that could be
suspended or terminated for jurisdictions that do not comply. However,
courts have previously blocked the administration's attempts to withhold
certain federal funds.
- House legislation: The Republican-led House of Representatives is advancing legislation, such as the "No Bailout for Sanctuary Cities Act," that would withhold federal funds from non-compliant jurisdictions.
Resistance and legal pushback
- Local resistance: Despite federal
pressure, many local Democratic leaders have publicly reaffirmed their
commitment to sanctuary policies and vowed to resist federal demands.
- Ongoing lawsuits: Legal battles are
ongoing, and sanctuary jurisdictions have often defeated past attempts by
the Trump administration to withhold funding or force cooperation.
- Federalism arguments: Some legal
experts and advocates argue that sanctuary policies are constitutionally
sound, citing principles of federalism and the right of states to manage
their own resources.
- Rescinded protections: The administration has rescinded policies that offered protection to individuals in "sensitive locations" like schools and hospitals, leading to legal action and protests from immigrant advocates.
Former President Trump has initiated several actions to end sanctuary policies in states, counties, and cities since beginning his second term in January 2025. His administration is primarily using executive orders, directives to federal agencies, and legal challenges to pressure jurisdictions into compliance with federal immigration enforcement efforts.
Key actions against sanctuary jurisdictions
Executive orders
On April 28, 2025, President Trump signed Executive Order 14287,
"Protecting American Communities from Criminal Aliens". The order
directs the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) to:
- Publish a list of states and local
jurisdictions that "obstruct the enforcement of Federal immigration
laws".
- Notify each listed jurisdiction of its
non-compliance and provide an opportunity to correct the policies.
- Pursue all available legal remedies and
enforcement measures against non-compliant jurisdictions.
- Identify potential cuts to federal funding, including grants and contracts, for jurisdictions that do not cooperate.
Publication of sanctuary
jurisdiction list
- On August 5, 2025, the DOJ published an
initial list of jurisdictions deemed to be "sanctuary" areas.
The list includes states such as California, Illinois, and New York, as
well as multiple cities and counties.
- DHS also published its own list in May
2025.
- The lists identify jurisdictions based on
laws or policies that limit or block local law enforcement from
cooperating with federal immigration officials.
- As of October 2025, the DOJ has indicated it may update this list regularly.
Funding cuts and legal
challenges
- In February 2025, the DOJ issued a memo
stating it would deny federal funds to "sanctuary
jurisdictions".
- The administration has filed multiple
lawsuits against jurisdictions, including New York City and the states of
New York and Illinois, arguing that their sanctuary policies impede
federal law.
- However, these funding cuts and lawsuits have faced legal challenges from cities and states, with some courts blocking the administration's attempts. Opponents argue the federal government cannot commandeer local resources for federal immigration enforcement.
Other actions
- The Trump administration has directed
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to increase enforcement actions
in sanctuary jurisdictions.
- Executive orders have also instructed federal agencies to ensure that federal funding does not "subsidize or promote illegal immigration".
Challenges to the administration's efforts
Despite the administration's
actions, legal experts and officials in targeted jurisdictions have noted
several hurdles and limitations:
- Legal precedent: Similar attempts to
withhold federal funding during Trump's first term were blocked by courts,
which cited legal protections like the Tenth Amendment's
anti-commandeering doctrine. This precedent may apply to the new efforts.
- Ongoing lawsuits: Many of the
administration's lawsuits are still pending in court and have yielded few
tangible results so far, with most jurisdictions maintaining their
sanctuary policies.
- Definition of
"sanctuary": There is no single legal definition of a
"sanctuary jurisdiction," which complicates efforts to enforce a
uniform policy and target specific cities or states.
- Local resistance: Many officials in sanctuary jurisdictions, such as the mayors of Chicago and Boston, have vowed to resist federal pressure and defend their policies
Comments
States are not empowered to set their own immigration laws. The Supreme Court will likely make this ruling to favor the Supremacy Clause. Their Ruling will likely support Trump’s position that the Federal Government is in charge of Immigration.
Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader
No comments:
Post a Comment