Mediaboss Marketing

U.S. District Court Judge William H. Orrick blocked President Trumps attempt to defund sanctuary cities on Tuesday, setting a precedent for actions in response to the current administrations conservative platform. The nationwide ruling comes months after Trumps January executive order on immigration, which demanded that the Justice Department and Department of Homeland Security block cities from receiving funds if they refused to cooperate with the controversial order. Orricks ruling further reminds us of the courts rejection of Trumps previous executive order for a seven-nation Muslim travel ban back in February.

According to theNew York Times, thecourt ruled that Trumps move to tie billions of dollars in federal funding to immigration enforcement overstepped his executive powers, since the powers of spending are placed within the responsibilities of Congress. Orricks decision is a temporary one, until the constitutional backing of Trumps executive order is further checked and digested, but it is valid nationwide.

The U.S. courts progress is living proof that the Trump administrations often racist and ignorant plans are supported neither by a large percentage of the American public nor by the Constitution. Many times, the judiciary fails in upholding equality and justice, regarding the loophole-filled lobbying process as well as systemic issues such as racial profiling and mass incarceration. In this case, however, District Judge Orrick of San Francisco blocked a large part of the administrations conservative immigration policy before it had been brought to fruition.

This is win for many proponents of immigration and immigration reform, and may signify a growing understanding among the public through a constitutional and social lens. No longer is immigration reform a debate between the left and the right. The San Francisco case ruled that the federal command of the city to work with immigration agents broke the trust between local authorities and immigrants, who the city argued would become less likely to report crimes or serve as witnesses," The New York Times reported.

According to CNN, White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus claimed on Tuesday that the administration would take action to appeal Orricks ruling. In a late night statement, the White House called Orricks ruling, an egregious overreach by a single, unelected district judge.

Despite the backlash from the White House over Orricks ruling, the judge explained that the ruling does not take the power away from the White House to create its own definition of a sanctuary city, nor deny the government the ability to enforce conditions on federal grants. Additionally, the Justice Department vowed it would continue to uphold requirements for grants and further comply with the legal system.

As LMU students, we are all called to be global citizens, to uphold Jesuit values and fight for the integrity of humanity in the face of adversaries who threaten to demoralize those around us. With Sacred Heart Chapel named as a safe space for undocumented individuals, it is important to recognize the significance of this court ruling and understand the implications that may have occurred on our own campus had Trumps intentions been realized. While it is comforting to know that our legal system prevented racist and extremist values from informing national monetary policy, we must be weary of future legislation that could threaten the integrity of all Americans regardless of citizenship or documentation and actively fight to prevent it from coming to fruition.

More:
Board Ed: Global citizens in the age of immigration reform - Los Angeles Loyolan (subscription)