A federal judge’s decision to temporarily block President Donald Trump’s executive order aimed at withholding federal funds from sanctuary cities has drawn sharp criticism from legal experts, with George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley calling it one of the most “problematic” challenges to the president’s authority.
On Thursday, U.S. District Judge William H. Orrick, appointed by former President Barack Obama, issued a temporary injunction in Northern California halting Trump’s order to defund cities and counties that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement.
The executive order directed Trump’s cabinet to evaluate whether sanctuary policies interfere with federal law enforcement and, if so, to withhold funds.
Trump’s Sovereign Wealth Fund: What Could It Mean For Your Money?
Speaking on Fox News’ “The Ingraham Angle” Friday, Turley discussed the ruling with guest host Kayleigh McEnany, who asked whether Trump has the legal authority to enact such measures.
“Well, the astonishing thing, of course, is they’re now coming by the gross. I mean, we’re getting three a day. They’re increasing,” Turley said.
“The Supreme Court has repeatedly said they want to stop national injunctions. They’ve tried to rein in judges a bit, including a judge in D.C. that should never have taken a case to begin with.”
Turley singled out Orrick’s ruling as particularly troubling.
This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year
“But we’re now seeing three of these come down in a single day. The one in San Francisco, I think, is very problematic,” he said.
“I think the judge pulled the trigger too fast. You know, this is a judge who said, ‘No, you cannot withhold money from Sanctuary Cities.’”
He further criticized the speed of the decision, noting the executive order’s process was still in its early stages.
“But the executive order told his cabinet, Trump’s cabinet, ‘I need you to look at this, evaluate it, and tell me if they’re interfering with federal enforcement, and then to withhold funds’. There’s a lot of runway between here and there in determining what they’re going to do. This judge just went ahead and said, ‘I’m stopping everything,’” Turley said.
Trump’s push for mass deportations of illegal immigrants has faced resistance from Democrat-led sanctuary cities, prompting legal battles.
In February, Attorney General Pam Bondi filed lawsuits against Chicago, Cook County, and the state of Illinois over their sanctuary policies, as the Department of Justice seeks to enforce federal immigration laws.
The broader immigration crackdown has also led to high-profile arrests. On Thursday, former New Mexico Democrat Judge Jose “Joel” Cano and his wife, Nancy Cano, were taken into custody by federal authorities.
Homeland Security Investigations told the Daily Caller News Foundation that Cano faces charges of “tampering with evidence,” while Nancy Cano is charged with “conspiracy to tamper with evidence” in connection to an illegal immigrant arrested on their property.
The following day, Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan was arrested after an FBI investigation into allegations that she helped conceal a migrant charged with violent crimes from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.
Wild! Attorney General Pam Bondi explains what really happened with Milwaukee Judge Hannah Dugan that led to her arrest by FBI:
“The Judge learns that ICE was outside to get the guy, because he had been deported in 2013, came back into our country, charged with committing these… pic.twitter.com/Af7a1JdJR4
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) April 25, 2025
The rapid pace of legal challenges and arrests underscores the contentious fight over immigration policy.
As Trump’s administration presses forward, the clash between federal authority and sanctuary jurisdictions continues to escalate in courtrooms across the country.
Connect with Vetted Off-Duty Cops to Instantly Fulfill Your Security Needs
Read the full article here