‘Sanctuary cities’ getting law enforcement grants despite administration attempts to block funding

In this Feb. 26, 2018 file photo, a banner to welcome immigrants is shown through a fisheye lens over the main entrance to the Denver City and County Building. The U.S. Justice Department told The Associated Press at the end of February 2019 that 28 jurisdictions, including Denver, that were targeted in 2017 over what it considered "sanctuary" policies have been cleared for law enforcement grant funding. (AP Photo/David Zalubowski, File)

By WILSON RING,  Associated Press  MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) 03/02 — About 18 months after the Trump administration threatened to withhold law enforcement grants from nearly 30 places around the country it felt weren’t doing enough to work with federal immigration agents, all but one have received or been cleared to get the money, the Justice Department said.

In most cases, courts chipped away at the crackdown that escalated in November 2017 with letters from the Justice Department of former Attorney General Jeff Sessions to 29 cities, metro areas, counties or states it considered as having adopted “sanctuary policies” saying those policies may violate federal law.

Of those 29 jurisdictions — which include cities as large as Los Angeles and as small as Burlington, Vermont — only Oregon has yet to be cleared to receive the grants from 2017, a Justice Department spokesman told The Associated Press this week.

Vermont officials announced Monday that they had been told the state Department of Public Safety would be getting $2.3 million in law enforcement grants that had been blocked. Vermont had not joined any of the legal cases, instead corresponding directly with the Justice Department.

U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat, declared victory, saying the money would be used primarily on anti-drug efforts.

“State and local law enforcement agencies already are stretched thin, and withholding these federal grants only makes their work more difficult,” Leahy said in an email to the AP. “It’s unthinkable that the Trump Justice Department would hold these funds hostage over an unrelated dispute on immigration policy.”

Last summer, the U.S. Conference of Mayors sued in Illinois on behalf of its member cities focusing on the issue. In September, a federal court temporarily blocked the Justice Department from withholding the funds for the jurisdictions represented by the conference.

The conference’s litigation is now focused on making the order affecting the 2017 grants permanent and apply to 2018 grants, as well, said Kate O’Brien, a Chicago attorney who represented the mayors.

In this June 20, 2018, file photo, protesters demonstrate outside the federal courthouse in Sacramento, Calif., where a judge heard arguments over the U.S. Justice Department’s request to block three California laws that extend protections to people in the country illegally. The Justice Department told The Associated Press at the end of February 2019 that 28 jurisdictions, including Sacramento, that were targeted in 2017 over what it considered “sanctuary” policies have been cleared for law enforcement grant funding. (AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli, File)

 

Other federal courts have ruled against the Justice Department. Similar cases are being litigated across the country, and the Justice Department is considering appealing some unfavorable rulings.

The Trump administration has long argued that places that don’t cooperate with federal immigration authorities, often called “sanctuary cities,” pose a threat to public safety.

“I continue to urge all jurisdictions under review to reconsider policies that place the safety of their communities and their residents at risk,” Sessions said in a statement in January 2018. “Protecting criminal aliens from federal immigration authorities defies common sense and undermines the rule of law.”

The details differ by jurisdiction, but the Justice Department felt law enforcement agencies in those communities weren’t sufficiently committing themselves to cooperating with federal immigration agents when officers came in contact with people who might not be in the country legally.

Aside from confirming the clearance of grants to the 28 jurisdictions , Justice Department spokesman Steven Stafford declined to comment.

Some, but not all, of the 28 jurisdictions were cleared for the grants without changing the policies that triggered the original concern from the Justice Department, now led by Attorney General William Barr. And not all of the places actually have the money in hand yet, or have been told they’ve been cleared to get it.

Ken Martinez, the county attorney for Bernalillo County, New Mexico, said officials there had yet to hear about 2017 grant funding and are eager to get it.

“It will be incredibly helpful,” Martinez said. “I can tell you there’s been a high level of frustration from people on both sides of the issue.”

In West Palm Beach, Florida, the Justice Department was concerned about the wording of a city resolution dealing with police investigations involving citizenship or immigration status. A year ago, a memo was sent to city employees saying they “may” share information with federal authorities.

“So no funds (were) lost on our end,” said police Sgt. David Lefont, noting the total was less than $100,000.

That some of the threatened cities ended up changing their policies amounts to at least a partial victory for the Trump administration, said Jessica Vaughan, the director of policy studies for the Center For Immigration Studies, which advocates for tight restrictions on immigration.

“What it looks like to me, the Trump Administration is not able to fully enforce cooperation with ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) to the extent they would like to, but it is able to fully enforce compliance with existing federal law that some sanctuary jurisdictions have had to change their policies in order to get their money,” Vaughan said.

But other jurisdictions were cleared to get the money without having to change anything.

“The court in our cases, and in similar cases throughout the country, has found the attorney general is not authorized to impose these conditions,” said O’Brien, the attorney for the mayors’ group.

The Vermont settlement of the 2017 grants is among the last.

Even before the 2017 letters were sent, federal courts across the country had begun to rule against the Trump administration’s efforts. And they continue.

A federal judge in Los Angeles ruled Feb. 15 that the Justice Department exceeded its authority and ordered a permanent, nationwide injunction against requiring police departments to cooperate with immigration authorities in order to receive the grants.

Oregon, the only one of the 29 jurisdictions not yet cleared for the 2017 grants, last fall filed its own lawsuit against the Justice Department. The lawsuit, which also covers grants for 2018, accused Trump and Matthew Whitaker, acting attorney general at the time, of trying to “impermissibly commandeer the resources” of Oregon and its largest city, Portland.

“For years, these grants have provided millions of dollars to law enforcement in Oregon,” Rosenblum said in November. “But, suddenly these public safety funds have been withdrawn because Oregon will not submit to U.S. DOJ’s demand that Oregon participate in its immigration enforcement efforts.”

___

Contributing to this report were Associated Press writers Eliot Spagat in San Diego; Paul Elias in San Francisco; Susan Montoya Bryan in Albuquerque, New Mexico; Andrew Selsky in Salem, Oregon; and AP News Researcher Jennifer Farrar in New York.

 

https://www.apnews.com/cbb6091bebd94f56889ceef6c3899460

Copyright 2019 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Posted in: Court Rulings, Dept. of Justice, Lawsuits, Police, Sanctuary Cities/States, U.S. Government

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

twenty − 15 =

Terms of Use for Posting Comments

Terms of Use

This site (the “Site”) is operated and maintained by Law Enforcement Education Foundation, Corporation (“Company”). Throughout the Site, the terms “we”, “us” and “our” refer to Company.  The words “user,” “you” and “your” as used herein refer to you.

Please read these terms and conditions of use (“Terms of Use”) carefully before contributing content. If you do not agree to these Terms of Use, please do not contribute content. Your use of the Site is subject to the Terms and Conditions found here .

By contributing content to the Site, you represent and warrant that you are at least eighteen (18) years old and that you have read and understand these Terms of Use and any amendments thereto and agree to be bound by them. If you are not at least eighteen (18) years old or you do not agree and accept these Terms of Use, you are prohibited from contributing content.

From time to time, we may permit users to submit content to the Site.  You hereby acknowledge and agree that by submitting remarks, comments, suggestions, ideas, graphics, feedback, edits, concepts, comments, photographs, illustrations and other materials (other than personal information and/or registration information) through the Site (individually and collectively, “Submissions”), you (i) grant us a nonexclusive, royalty-free, perpetual, transferable, irrevocable and fully sub-licensable right to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, translate, distribute, publish, create derivative works from and publicly display and perform such Submissions throughout the world in any media, now known or hereafter created, without attribution to you; (ii) grant us the right to pursue at law any person or entity that violates your and/or our rights in your Submissions; and (iii) forever waive any and all of your rights, including but not limited to moral rights, if any, in and to your Submissions, including, without limitation, any all rights or requirements of attribution or identification of you as the author of the Submission or any derivative thereof.  We reserve the right to remove any of your Submissions from the Site, in whole or in part, without notice to you, for any reason or no reason.

Submissions are made voluntarily. Any submissions which include personally identifiable information are subject to our Privacy Policy found here .  You may not upload or otherwise publish content on the Site that (i) is confidential to you or any third party; (ii) is untrue, inaccurate, false or other than an original work of your authorship; (iii) that relates to or impersonates any other person; (iv) violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property rights of any person or entity; (v) contains any content, personally identifiable information or other information, or materials of any kind that relate or refer to any other person or entity other than the provider of the products, goods or services to which the Submission relates; or (vi) violates any law, or in any manner infringes or interferes with the rights of others, including but not limited to the use of names, information, or materials that (A) libel, defame, or invade the privacy of any third party, (B) are obscene or pornographic, (C) are harmful, threatening, offensive, abusive, harassing, vulgar, false or inaccurate, racially, sexually, ethnically or are otherwise objectionable or otherwise contrary to the laws of any place where such Submissions may be accessed; (D) constitute personal attacks on other individuals; (E) promote criminal, immoral or illegal activity; (F) promote or advertise any person, product or service or solicit funds; or (G) are deemed confidential by any contract or policy.

You are solely responsible for any Submissions you make and their accuracy. We take no responsibility and assume no liability for any Submissions posted by you or any third party.

Unless approved by us in writing in advance, you agree not to: (i) provide or create a link to the Site; or (ii) create any frames at any other sites pertaining to any of the content located on the Site.

We reserve the right, in our discretion, to update, change or replace any part of these Terms of Use for Posting Comments by posting updates and/or changes to our Site.  It is your responsibility to check this page periodically for changes.  Your continued use of, and/or access to the Site, following the posting of any changes to these Terms of Use for Posting Comments, constitutes your acceptance of those changes.