On April 28, 2025, the Trump Administration issued an Executive Order entitled “Protecting American Communities From Criminal Aliens” which is anticipated to result in a list of “sanctuary jurisdictions” that “obstruct the enforcement of Federal immigration laws” and possibly seek legal enforcement on such jurisdictions. While a recent court ruling granted a preliminary injunction blocking the Trump Administration from withholding, freezing or conditioning federal funding from several jurisdictions that maintain sanctuary policies consistent with the definition of “sanctuary jurisdictions” the Executive Order seeks to suspend or terminate federal funding “as appropriate.”
Key Takeaways
- Sanctuary Jurisdictions will have 30 days to await Trump’s “notice” of sanctuary status.
- While there is not a codified definition of a “sanctuary jurisdiction” the Attorney General issued guidance on this issue on February 6, 2025 that the Trump Administration is expected to follow.
- If served with a notice, please consult with your city attorney immediately.
Last week, on April 24, 2025, Judge William Orrick granted a preliminary injunction blocking the Trump Administration from withholding, freezing, or conditioning federal funding to 14 cities and counties around the country that maintain policies placing them within the definition of a “sanctuary jurisdiction.” According to the Attorney General’s February 6, 2025 memorandum, the DOJ classifies “sanctuary jurisdictions” as:
- state and local jurisdictions that refuse to comply with 8 U.S.C. § 1373(a), which prohibits laws and policies that prevent local officials from communicating with federal immigration authorities about an individual’s immigration status;
- refuse to certify compliance with § 1373;
- or willfully fail to comply with other applicable federal immigration laws.
While this court order only applies to the cities and counties named in the lawsuit, the impact of the decision is significant as it supports prior court decisions that also found President Trump’s early executive orders targeting funding to sanctuary jurisdictions unconstitutional. The judge is expected to issue another ruling discussing the issues in more detail at a later date.
Yesterday, April 28, 2025, the Trump administration issued executive orders regarding immigration, including an order titled “Protecting American Communities From Criminal Aliens.” The Executive Order provides that within 30 days the administration will publish a list of state and local jurisdictions that “obstruct the enforcement of Federal immigration laws (sanctuary jurisdictions)” and will notify each sanctuary jurisdiction on the list regarding its defiance and/or violations of federal criminal law. The administration will continue to update the list on a rolling basis. If a jurisdiction remains a sanctuary jurisdiction after receiving this notice, the administration will pursue legal action and enforcement measures against the jurisdiction. Although there is no codified statutory definition of a “sanctuary jurisdiction,” the Attorney General’s February 6, 2025 memorandum provides guidance. In prior litigation, and as our below update of the most recent litigation indicates, the courts have made it clear that cities are not bound to enforce federal immigration policy and can lawfully limit their cooperation with federal immigration authorities but not “obstruct” federal enforcement efforts.
The Executive Order’s reference to various federal statutes such as obstruction and harboring (18 U.S.C. § 1501, 8 U.S.C. § 1324 & 18 U.S.C. 374) all require the government to prove knowing and willful intent to obstruct, resist or impede an “authorized person” from conducting enforcement efforts such as the serving of a warrant. For example, the Trump Administration may take the position that not honoring an administrative warrant by not allowing ICE officers entry into city facilities not open to public use or access, to conduct a raid or facilitate the use of local law enforcement to assist in a raid allegedly constitutes “obstruction.” Cities will point out that administrative removal warrants, the most often used type of warrant by ICE/CBP, do not authorize entering a home or other area where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy, and a city is within its Fourth Amendment rights to prevent any illegal search and seizure.
We can anticipate that there will be future litigation on this point and the Trump Administration’s directive to “notify each sanctuary jurisdiction regarding its defiance of Federal immigration law enforcement and any potential violations of Federal criminal law” will be the factual basis of that litigation. Additionally, a sanctuary jurisdiction’s federal funds could be suspended or terminated “as appropriate.” Here again, this defunding effort has been the subject of prior and ongoing litigation.
As of this moment, two other executive orders have been issued today. One regarding mandating all truck drivers pass an English proficiency test, and another aimed at strengthening local law enforcement. The latter is titled “Strengthening and Unleashing America’s Law Enforcement to Pursue Criminals and Protect Innocent Citizens” and it states that the administration will come after local officials who direct the obstruction of criminal law, including “prohibiting law enforcement officers from carrying out duties necessary for public safety and law enforcement.”
Our firm will continue monitoring these developments closely and provide updates as the situation evolves. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or require further assistance.