I am pleased to provide a positive update on the status of San Francisco's and Santa Clara County's lawsuits asking that the court block the Trump administration's executive order which threatened to withhold millions of dollars of federal funding from sanctuary cities and counties.
The goal of the executive order is to punish local governments that have policies protecting immigrant families by withholding many millions of dollars for child care, housing and other programs.
On July 20th, U.S. District Court Judge William Orrick denied the Trump Administration's motion to reconsider the Court's April 25 order granting a nationwide preliminary injunction blocking the executive order and dismiss the lawsuits.
At a July 12th hearing, Judge Orrick said he was "very much inclined" to maintain a court order that blocks the Trump administration from withholding federal funds from sanctuary cities like Oakland, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago and others.
The Court's July 20th order upholds the court's nationwide preliminary injunction blocking Trump's order in City and County of San Francisco v. Donald J. Trump, et al. and County of Santa Clara v. Donald J. Trump, et al.
Oakland and a broad coalition of cities, counties and other local jurisdictions filed amicus briefs asking the court to block Trump's sanctuary city executive order and asking the court to deny the federal government's motions to reconsider its order and dismiss the lawsuits.
At issue at the July 12th hearing was Attorney General Jeff Sessions' "new" interpretation of the executive order that claimed the government only intended to withhold money from certain law enforcement programs.
During the hearing, Judge Orrick pointed out that regardless of whether Sessions' interpretation has any credibility whatsoever, his interpretation is essentially meaningless because the Attorney General could change his opinion at any time.
It bears repeating that not only is Trump's threat to strip federal funding from Oakland and other sanctuary jurisdictions unconstitutional, it undermines public health and safety and evidences callous disregard for the lives and welfare of our communities, our children and our families.
We will continue to fight these assaults on our constitutional rights, and I will continue to update you as this case progresses.