Sanctuary cities and states are safe zones for illigel immigrants who are in open violation of federal law.
If a state is violating federal law, should they be able to receive federal grants?
Not if the Trump administration has anything to say about it!
And guess what?!
A federal court has determined that the Trump administration is correct.
The court ruled that if a state is refusing to cooperate with federal law and federal immigration authorities, then the Trump administration can withhold federal grants.
NBC is among the first to report the late-breaking news:
Up to $250 million is dispensed through the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program.
The Trump administration can withhold millions a year can be withheld to states and local criminal justice efforts if they do not cooperate with federal immigration authorities.
The ruling was made in the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York.
This is a key win for the Trump administration's efforts to crack down on illegal immigration and "sanctuary" policies.
Fox News has more on the historic ruling:
A federal appeals court on Wednesday handed a major win to the Trump administration in its fight against “sanctuary” jurisdictions, ruling that it can deny grant money to states that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration authorities.
The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York overturned a lower court ruling that stopped the administration’s 2017 move to withhold grant money from the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program, which dispenses over $250 million a year to state and local criminal justice efforts.
“Today’s decision rightfully recognizes the lawful authority of the Attorney General to ensure that Department of Justice grant recipients are not at the same time thwarting federal law enforcement priorities,” a DOJ spokesman said in a statement. “The grant conditions here require states and cities that receive DOJ grants to share information about criminals in custody. The federal government uses this information to enforce national immigration laws--policies supported by successive Democrat and Republican administrations.”
“All Americans will benefit from increased public safety as this Administration is able to implement its lawful immigration and public safety policies,” the statement said.
The latest decision conflicts with rulings from other appeals courts across the country concerning sanctuary policies, indicating a Supreme Court review is ultimately likely.
Many immediately took to Twitter to praise the decision!
Cities like New York City receive up to $4 million a year from the fund.
If they do not cooperate with federal immigration authorities, they may no longer receive these federal grants, the Court ruled.
The New York Times has more details on how the funding works:
But the Second Circuit said its reading of the law showed that the federal government has the authority to impose conditions on states and localities receiving federal grant money. The appellate judges noted that the U.S. Supreme Court has observed that the federal government has power over states where immigration policy is concerned.
“Today’s decision rightfully recognizes the lawful authority of the attorney general to ensure that Department of Justice grant recipients are not at the same time thwarting federal law enforcement priorities,” said Alexei Woltornist, a spokesman for the Justice Department.
It was unclear if the states planned to appeal. The Supreme Court often hears cases to resolve conflicts among federal appeals courts.
The federal money in question is the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program. Created in 2006 and named after a young New York police officer fatally shot while guarding the home of a cooperating witness, the grant is used by Congress to dispense more than $250 million every year to state and local authorities for criminal justice efforts.
New York City, for instance, receives about $4 million a year in JAG funding to pay salaries for emergency responders and fund drug prosecutions, among other programs.
At least 7 states could be impacted if they do not change their sanctuary policies.