Sanctuary Cities List: L.A. County Excluded
Trump administration Escalates Crackdown on Sanctuary Jurisdictions
Table of Contents
The Trump administration is aggressively targeting cities and states with “sanctuary” policies, escalating a nationwide effort too compel local authorities to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement. Attorney General Pam Bondi has spearheaded the initiative, leveraging legal action and financial incentives to dismantle policies perceived as obstructing federal law.
What are Sanctuary Jurisdictions?
“Sanctuary jurisdictions” – encompassing cities, counties, and states – generally limit their cooperation with federal immigration authorities. These policies often involve refusing to honor Immigration and customs Enforcement (ICE) detainer requests, restricting local law enforcement from inquiring about a person’s immigration status, and limiting information sharing with federal agencies. Proponents argue these policies foster trust between immigrant communities and local law enforcement, encouraging reporting of crimes without fear of deportation. Conversely, critics contend they shield individuals who pose a threat to public safety and undermine federal immigration law.
DOJ Targets Cities and states with Legal Action
In April, president Trump signed an Executive Order titled ’Protecting American Communities from Criminal aliens,’ directing the Justice Department to identify and list jurisdictions deemed to be violating federal immigration laws. The resulting list includes 13 states – primarily along the West Coast and in the Northeast - and four county jurisdictions: Baltimore County, MD; Cook County, IL; San Diego County, and San Francisco County. Eighteen cities were also named, with California accounting for three: Berkeley, Los Angeles, and San Francisco.
The Justice Department hasn’t simply published a list; it’s actively pursuing legal challenges against those deemed in violation. A meaningful example is the June lawsuit filed against the city of Los Angeles, Mayor Karen Bass, and the L.A. City Council. The lawsuit alleges that L.A.’s sanctuary law is “illegal” and that city officials “refuse to cooperate or share information, even when requested, with federal immigration authorities.”
“Jurisdictions like Los Angeles that flout federal law by prioritizing illegal aliens over American citizens are undermining law enforcement at every level,” Bondi stated. “It ends under president Trump.”
The administration’s approach extends beyond lawsuits. In July, Bondi announced that Louisville, Kentucky, had agreed to abandon its sanctuary policies following a letter from her office. She framed this as a “major victory” and a warning to other cities: “Instead of forcing us to sue you – which we will, without hesitation – follow the law, get rid of sanctuary policies, and work with us to fix the illegal immigration crisis.” Bondi shared this message on X (formerly Twitter), emphasizing the Department of Justice’s willingness to litigate.
Incentives for Compliance and Federal Assistance
The Justice Department is employing a dual strategy: pressure through legal action and incentives for cooperation. The department recently announced it will “assist any jurisdiction that desires to be taken off this list to identify and eliminate their sanctuary policies.” This suggests a willingness to work with local authorities to modify policies and achieve compliance, perhaps avoiding costly and protracted legal battles.
This proactive approach signals a continued commitment to dismantling sanctuary policies nationwide. The administration believes full cooperation with federal immigration enforcement is crucial for public safety and upholding the rule of law. The ongoing legal battles and the offer of federal assistance demonstrate a extensive strategy aimed at reshaping the landscape of immigration enforcement across the United States.