An executive order on “sanctuary cities” signed by Donald Trump on Wednesday has placed in the crosshairs over 400 cities and counties that offer some form of safe haven to America’s 11 million undocumented migrants.

These localities include some of the largest, most progressive metropolises in the United States, many of which have already begun preparations to fight one of Trump’s most aggressive campaign pledges – to force compliance with federal immigration agencies in a bid to ramp up deportations. The beginnings of that pledge have now been formalised by executive action within Trump’s first week in office.

The order issued on Wednesday claims these jurisdictions “willfully violate federal law” causing “immeasurable harm to the American people”, and instructs the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the US Department of Justice (DoJ) to explore which cities could be in violation of federal law and ways of stripping sanctuary jurisdictions of federal grant money, which amounts to billions of dollars across many different federal departments.

The order also instructs the US attorney general to explore “appropriate enforcement action” against any local government agency it deems to be in violation of a broad federal law that encourages – but does not compel – communication between local authorities and the DHS.



Trump’s mandate also issues an extraordinary instruction to the DHS to publish a weekly list of so-called “criminal actions” committed by undocumented migrants and publicly announce which jurisdictions had previously “ignored or otherwise failed” to detain the accused individuals.

Researchers at the American Immigration Council concluded in a 2015 report that undocumented immigrants “are less likely to commit serious crimes or be behind bars than the native-born, and high rates of immigration are associated with lower rates of violent crime and property crime”.

Although they vary by jurisdiction, sanctuary laws often prevent local law enforcement from aiding federal immigration authorities to identify undocumented migrants who are eligible for deportation unless they have been charged with severe crimes. Supporters argue these policies encourage cooperation and trust between large undocumented communities and local police. Critics argue, with little statistical evidence, that the policies result in dangerous criminal migrants being allowed to remain in the US.

Trump’s order is broad, and will require substantial review by the DHS and DoJ and potentially legislative reform in Congress, but it is an aggressive statement of intent that has already provoked anger from powerful local politicians.

The New York attorney general, Eric Schneiderman, said on Wednesday that Trump “lacks the constitutional authority to cut off funding to states and cities simply because they have lawfully acted to protect immigrant families.

“Local governments seeking to protect their immigrant communities from federal overreach have every right to do so,” Schneiderman said in a statement.

“Any attempt to bully local governments into abandoning policies that have proven to keep our cities safe is not only unconstitutional, but threatens the safety of our citizens.”

He added: “I urge President Trump to revoke this executive order right away. If he does not, I will do everything in my power to fight it.”

New York’s mayor, Bill De Blasio, who has vowed to preserve sanctuary laws in the city, said on Wednesday that Trump’s order carried grave security threats for the city as federal anti-terror funding could be at stake.

“President Trump issued an executive order today and its reported purpose was to enhance public safety, but here in New York City and in cities across nation, this executive order could in fact undermine public safety and make it left safe,” De Blasio said.

“It could undermine relationships between police and communities … and second, potential funding cuts would come first and foremost from the NYPD,” said De Blasio.

Federal money at risk included $156m in urban area security funding, $110m of which goes towards anti-terrorism efforts, De Blasio said.

The mayor on Tuesday announced an $84.7bn budget that skirted assumptions about any federal cutbacks from the Trump administration. Nonetheless, some city politicians said on Wednesday the signal of intent from the new president could “wipe out every dollar” of city savings.

Chicago’s mayor, Rahm Emanuel, a former chief of staff to Barack Obama, has also vowed to preserve his city’s sanctuary status.

The sentiment of uneasy resilience was echoed on the west coast by the Los Angeles mayor, Eric Garcetti, who argued Trump’s order would result in severe economic and public safety repercussions.

“Splitting up families and cutting funding to any city – especially Los Angeles, where 40% of the nation’s goods enter the US at our port, and more than 80m passengers traveled through our airport last year – puts the personal safety and economic health of our entire nation at risk. It is not the way forward for the United States,” Garcetti said in a statement.

Both Garcetti and Ed Lee, the mayor of San Francisco, another major sanctuary city, have announced additional legal services for immigrants since Trump’s election, citing their commitment to protecting undocumented residents.

The San Francisco city attorney is also exploring whether it could pursue legal action against the federal government if it withholds funds, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.

Federal grant money is usually administered through two different mechanisms, either through discretionary funding that is awarded to local authorities or non-government entities following a competitive application process, or formula funding that is mandatorily administered through legislation.

In theory, the latter of these two mechanisms would be harder for the Trump administration to revoke. But a source with knowledge of the administration’s thinking on the matter said the White House could argue that these formula grants could be revoked by arguing that the local authority being targeted had broken the law and was therefore in violation of terms of the grant.

Trump’s efforts will also face a serious fightback from Democrats in Congress.

Nancy Pelosi, the House minority leader, accused Trump of “turning his back on both our history and our values as a proud nation of immigrants”.

Pelosi’s district falls entirely within San Francisco, where the 2015 murder of Kathryn Steinle, allegedly by a man who was in the country illegally, was seized on by Trump and conservatives to hit back against sanctuary cities. The suspect, Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, had previously been turned over to authorities in San Francisco by the federal Bureau of Prisons – but a lapse in communication over an arrest warrant prompted him to be released before Steinle’s murder.

“Law-abiding, hard-working immigrant families deserve better than the Trump administration’s radical xenophobia,” Pelosi said in a statement.

The Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC), slammed the president for what they dubbed “draconian” actions.

“These executive orders fail to provide any practical solution to our nation’s broken immigration system,” New Mexico representative Michelle Lujan Grisham, the chairwoman of the CHC, told reporters on a conference call on Tuesday.

The efforts, she added, “are aimed at tearing apart families and breaking any hope of productive economic reform”.

Additional reporting by Amber Jamieson