U.S. District Court Judge William Orrick has granted a preliminary injunction blocking the Trump administration from enforcing a portion of its sanctuary cities executive order. Though the suit was brought by Santa Clara County, the city of San Francisco, and a few other jurisdictions, the order is to be applied nationwide.

BREAKING: Judge blocks Trump's sanctuary cities executive order (in about the strangest way possible…) pic.twitter.com/gn8C4y5hKd — Matt Zapotosky (@mattzap) April 25, 2017

Judge Orrick pointed out, though, that the order:

“…does not affect the ability of the Attorney General or the Secretary to enforce existing conditions of federal grants or 8 U.S.C. 1373, nor does it impact the Secretary’s ability to develop regulations or other guidance defining what a sanctuary jurisdiction is or designating a jurisdiction as such.”

The basis, Judge Orrick wrote, was that the President does not have the power of the purse.

“The Constitution vests the spending powers in Congress, not the President, so the Order cannot constitutionally place new conditions on federal funds.”

The upshot:

Feds can't take money that didn't have SPECIFIC requirement to comply with law on communication with ICE… — Matt Zapotosky (@mattzap) April 25, 2017





Feds also can’t bully locals into honoring ICE detainer requests by taking or threatening to take funding… — Matt Zapotosky (@mattzap) April 25, 2017



Sanctuary city fans, enjoy a symbolic victory.

UPDATE:

Department of Justice Spokesman Ian Prior said:

“The Department of Justice previously stated to the Court, and reiterates now, that it will follow the law with respect to regulation of sanctuary jurisdictions. Accordingly, the Department will continue to enforce existing grant conditions and will continue to enforce 8 U.S.C. 1373. Further, the order does not purport to enjoin the Department’s independent legal authority to enforce the requirements of federal law applicable to communities that violate federal immigration law or federal grant conditions.”

Prior did not say whether an appeal was planned.