A federal judge in California has issued a permanent national injunction against a Trump administration executive order against “sanctuary cities,” likely setting up a Supreme Court showdown in the near future.
In a 128-page ruling, a federal judge said on Wednesday that the Justice Department can’t withhold grant funding from Philadelphia for not complying with federal “sanctuary city” polices.
Another city is suing the Trump administration over its policy of linking policing grants to compliance with an executive order about sanctuary cities.
The city of Chicago is taking the Trump administration to court in a lawsuit that makes a series of constitutional claims stated in other sanctuary city cases.
United States Attorney General Jeff Sessions is expected to release a report this week that may urge more federal interdiction against state-level medical marijuana programs – a move that would raise some compelling legal and policy questions.
On June 23, 1987, the Supreme Court upheld the ability of the federal government to impose conditions on money received by the states.
New Jersey’s long struggle to legalize single-game sports betting within the state will likely end, one way or another, with a Supreme Court decision focusing on a broad constitutional issue.
The Justice Department wants a federal judge to drop or amend an injunction against President Trump’s sanctuary city executive order, and Attorney General Jeff Sessions has made a key change to lessen the policy’s potential impact on states, counties and cities.
The Justice Department’s announcement of funding sanctions against cities and counties that don’t honor some immigration enforcement policies is the latest step toward a seemingly inevitable legal showdown.
In a special live event at Georgetown University, Josh Blackman of the South Texas College of Law in Houston and Peter Edelman of Georgetown discuss the fate of federalism in the Trump era.