This case is another response to efforts by the Trump Administration to strip law enforcement funding from “sanctuary” cities and states unless their governments agree to participate in federal immigration enforcement.
The state of Oregon filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon on November 9, 2018. The plaintiff, represented by its attorney general, sued President Trump and the U.S. Attorney General under the the Declaratory Judgment Act, the mandamus statute, and the U.S. Constitution. The plaintiff claimed that immigration-related conditions imposed by the government on federal funding to the state violated the Spending Clause, separation-of-powers principles, and the Tenth Amendment. The plaintiff sought declaratory and mandamus relief, as well as an injunction to prevent the government from imposing the conditions on the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (Byrne JAG) program, which provides support for Oregon law enforcement. The case was assigned to Judge McShane.
The plaintiff stated that it was unlawfully deprived of federal funding for fiscal year 2017 due to its non-acquiescence with the immigration conditions imposed on the Byrne JAG grant, and it expects to be similarly deprived in FY 2018. The plaintiff alleged that the government imposed three unlawful conditions on FY 2017 Byrne JAG funds; these conditions require that grant recipients: comply with 8 U.S.C. § 1373, which bars local governments from restricting their employees from sharing citizenship and immigration status information with federal immigration authorities; give the federal government 48-hour notice prior to an arrestee’s release; and permit federal immigration officials to access any correctional or detention facility in order to meet with suspected undocumented immigrants.
For FY 2018, the plaintiff alleged that the government imposed two conditions materially identical to the notice and access conditions above. Additionally, the plaintiff stated that the government expanded the condition that recipients comply with § 1373, by also requiring them to comply with 8 U.S.C. § 1644, which is substantively similar. Applicants also must answer questions regarding their compliance with those two statutes, and the jurisdiction’s chief legal officer must certify that the jurisdiction will not violate 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a), which forbids the harboring or concealment of undocumented immigrants.
The plaintiff filed an amended complaint on Nov. 21, 2018, adding information related to another sanctuary city case that Oregon is involved in. As the result of a preliminary injunction in that case (City of Evanston et al. v. Sessions, 1:18-cv-04853), Oregon was provided with an award notice for FY 2017’s Byrne JAG program. However, the plaintiff pointed out in the amended complaint that the defendants have yet to process that award or disburse any funds, and the plaintiff still believes it is likely to be deprived of FY 2018 funds.
On March 5, 2019, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and lack of jurisdiction. The case is ongoing.
Sam Kulhanek - 03/06/2019
compress summary
