As we reported yesterday, Executive Order 13768, which gave the attorney general and secretary of Homeland Security the power to withdrawal federal funds from sanctuary cities for not being in compliance with federal law, was blocked by a federal judge.
The White House quickly released a statement condemning the judge, stating “Once again, a single district judge — this time in San Francisco — has ignored Federal immigration law to set a new immigration policy for the entire country. This decision occurred in the same sanctuary city that released the 5-time deported illegal immigrant who gunned down innocent Kate Steinle in her father’s arms. San Francisco, and cities like it, are putting the well-being of criminal aliens before the safety of our citizens, and those city officials who authored these policies have the blood of dead Americans on their hands.”
The judge in question was San Francisco’s William Orrick, an Obama appointee who ruled that the order violated the Constitution by attempting to punish local governments by seeking to “deprive local jurisdictions of congressional allocated funds without any notice or opportunity to be heard.” The man is apparently unaware of Article VI, Clause 2 of the Constitution, the “Supremacy Clause,” which establishes that federal law triumphs over state law.
His ruling was ridiculous, and given his history, it’s quite obvious it was entirely politically-motivated. As HotAir reported, You don’t have to look very far for some evidence that this judge has a partisan streak. Orrick is the same judge who granted a restraining order against the Center for Medical Progress, the group that released undercover videos of Planned Parenthood back in 2015. And according to the Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway, Orrick was an Obama campaign bundler who collected more than $200,000 for the candidate in 2008. He had also previously raised more than $100,000 for candidate John Kerry in 2004.
As Allahpundit pointed out last night, the judge’s decision doesn’t appear to interfere with AG Jeff Sessions ability to withhold some federal money from sanctuary cities, so the impact of the injunction may be more symbolic than anything else. And on that count, CNN’s Chris Cillizza argues the politics of the decision are a win for the Trump administration. He stated that “there is nothing the Republican base — and the bulk of Republican elected officials — hate more than what they view as liberal judges run amok. It’s the epitome — to Republicans — of liberals trying to institute their will on a populace without ever letting people vote or have their opinions heard.
Had there truly been something unconstitutional in the order, you’d think another judge would’ve challenged it earlier than three months after it was signed.
[Note: This post was authored by Matt Palumbo. Follow him on Twitter @MattPalumbo12]