Brand New Attorney General HALTS Funding for "Sanctuary Cities"

Newly sworn-in Attorney General Pam Bondi has ordered the Department of Justice to cut off all federal funding to sanctuary cities. 

The Attorney General (AG) of the United States has some authority to influence funding to states and localities, but withholding federal funds as a means of compelling state compliance with federal immigration laws is a complex issue.

Here’s how it generally works:

1. Conditional Funding:
The federal government can tie certain federal funding to compliance with specific conditions. This is a common approach used by the federal government to encourage states to follow certain policies or regulations. For example, the federal government may condition certain funds (such as law enforcement grants) on states and localities cooperating with federal immigration enforcement or other specific legal requirements.

2. Enforcing Immigration Laws:
The Attorney General has the authority to enforce federal laws, including immigration laws, but the states have their own authority under the Tenth Amendment and are not required to enforce federal immigration law. However, the federal government can encourage or compel compliance by conditioning certain types of funding, such as law enforcement grants, on cooperation with immigration enforcement efforts.

3. Legal Limits on Withholding Funds:
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the federal government cannot coerce states into enacting or enforcing federal policies by threatening to withhold funds in a way that is "so coercive" that it infringes on the states’ rights. For example, in the case of National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012), the Court ruled that the federal government could not withhold all Medicaid funds from states that refused to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act.

In terms of immigration, previous administrations have sought to leverage funding to encourage local law enforcement agencies to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement. However, the extent to which the AG or other federal agencies can withhold funding has been legally challenged. Courts have occasionally ruled that certain forms of withholding funds were overly coercive or violated state sovereignty.

4. Sanctuary Policies:
In recent years, some states and cities have adopted "sanctuary" policies that limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. The federal government, including the AG, has sought to use funding (e.g., the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant program) to encourage these states and localities to cooperate with federal immigration laws. However, these efforts have faced legal challenges, and courts have sometimes ruled against the federal government’s ability to withhold funding on these grounds.

Conclusion:
While the AG can play a significant role in promoting federal immigration enforcement and influencing the use of federal funds, directly withholding funding from states solely for non-compliance with immigration laws can be legally complicated. There are constitutional limits on the federal government's ability to pressure states through funding, and the courts have sometimes intervened to prevent overly coercive tactics.