Skip to main content

Supreme Court Dismisses Sanctuary City Cases

by Lynda Keever | Mar 11, 2021
Protesters holding signs advocating for sanctuary cities and against immigration enforcement policies.
Photo Source: Protesters hold up signs outside a courthouse in San Francisco, file photo, April 14, 2017. (AP Photo/Haven Daley)

On March 4, 2021, the Biden administration requested that the Supreme Court dismiss three pending appeals about Trump’s efforts to withhold law enforcement funds from cities and states that refused to cooperate with immigration authorities during the Trump administration.

The Supreme Court dismissed the cases.

Lawyers for the jurisdictions challenging Trump’s order to withhold funds agreed that the cases, which involved New York City, San Francisco, and several states including New York and California, should be dismissed.

President Biden rescinded Trump’s 2017 executive order that required U.S. agencies to withhold funds from the “sanctuary” jurisdictions. Lower courts had been divided on the legality of the policy. Trump’s order put conditions on the receipt of federal funds, requiring the bodies in question to give U.S. immigration officials access to their jails and advance notice when illegal immigrants were being released from custody.

San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera said, “We’re glad this issue has finally been put to rest. Federal officials can do their job in San Francisco, just like anywhere else in the country. But we were not about to let our police, firefighters and nurses be commandeered and turned into the Trump administration’s deportation force.”

The money at stake for San Francisco was about $1.4 million annually in federal funds, according to the city attorney’s office.

New York State Attorney General Letitia James said, “Local law enforcements’ ability to protect their jurisdictions should never be compromised to push an anti-immigrant agenda.” James added, “We look forward to continuing to work with the administration to ensure state and localities never have to choose between protecting their autonomy and protecting the public’s safety.”

The Trump administration provoked several legal challenges since 2017, advising that Justice Assistance Grants would be refused if local governments would not inform immigration agents at their request about the scheduled release of any person in custody “believed to be an alien,” sharing immigration status info with federal authorities, and allowing access to local jails to immigration officials.

Cities that limited cooperation with immigration authorities, like New York and San Francisco, were targeted by Trump administration policies. The Trump administration claimed the sanctuary cities were tolerating the presence of noncitizens who had committed crimes and were a public danger. These “sanctuary cities” believe that their limited cooperation with the immigration authorities improves public safety and increases trust between immigrant communities and the police.

The Trump administration imposed other measures on the sanctuary cities and used other tactics to try to coerce them into line with Trump’s policies. One of these measures was to bar New York residents from enrolling in Global Entry and other “trusted traveler” programs last year. Last April, while states were battling the pandemic, Trump suggested he would withhold aid to cities that limited their cooperation with immigration authorities.

New York Attorney General James said, “We’re pleased that despite the Trump administration’s attempts to exact revenge on cities and states through vindictive policies and continued litigation that we were able to work with the Biden administration to dismiss this case in the Supreme Court.”

Share This Article

If you found this article insightful, consider sharing it with your network.

Lynda Keever
Lynda Keever is a freelance writer and editor based in Asheville, NC. She is a licensed attorney, musician, traveler and adventurer. She brings her love of discovery and passion for details to her writing and to the editing of the works of others.

Related Articles

U.S. Supreme Court building with its neoclassical columns and steps beneath a blue sky.

Supreme Court Refuses to Restore Judges' Power to Pause Deportation Cases

The Supreme Court on Tuesday, October 27, 2026, rejected an emergency request to restore immigration judges' authority to temporarily close certain deportation cases, leaving in place a nationwide restriction that prevents judges from using a Biden-era regulation to pause proceedings while immigrants pursue other forms of legal protection.The justices denied... Read More about Supreme Court Refuses to Restore Judges' Power to Pause Deportation Cases

Protesters sit on city steps holding signs reading “ICE OUT OF NYC” during an immigration demonstration.

Federal Judge Throws Out Trump's Bid to Overturn NYC Sanctuary Laws

A federal judge has thrown out the Trump administration's lawsuit against New York City's sanctuary laws, rejecting its attempt to force local authorities to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement. The October 15, 2026, ruling preserves city restrictions on assisting U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).U.S. District Judge Ramón E. Reyes... Read More about Federal Judge Throws Out Trump's Bid to Overturn NYC Sanctuary Laws

The U.S. Supreme Court building viewed from below against a partly cloudy sky.

Supreme Court Clears Trump to Resume Third-Country Deportations as Justices Take Up Legal Fight

The Supreme Court on Tuesday cleared the Trump administration to resume deporting migrants to countries other than their own while the justices prepare to decide whether the policy violates federal law and constitutional due process protections.The unsigned September 29 order puts on hold a federal court judgment that required migrants... Read More about Supreme Court Clears Trump to Resume Third-Country Deportations as Justices Take Up Legal Fight

Two men in suits at a press conference, with American and state flags in the background; one man speaks at a microphone.

Federal Judge Dismisses Justice Department Challenge to Minnesota Immigration Policies

A federal judge has dismissed the Justice Department’s lawsuit seeking to invalidate Minnesota laws and local policies that limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement, handing the state and several local governments a significant victory in the continuing dispute over so-called sanctuary jurisdictions.Chief U.S. District Judge Eric Tostrud ruled on July... Read More about Federal Judge Dismisses Justice Department Challenge to Minnesota Immigration Policies

Legal term

Search articles and Legalpedia

Subscribe to Newsletter