February 1 Trump ending all federal funding to sanctuary states / cities

[T. A. Gardner]

You are saying words that have no meaning.

There is no concept in law that obligated cooperation and says that is obstructing if you do not.

The Executive is the enforcement arm for Congress over appropriations ONLY if Congress requests it.

No POTUS gets to decide unilaterally to withhold funds Congress has allocated because they think a State is doing something wrong.

You are just a deeply stupid person who does not understand the law or Constitution and yet has strong ignorant opinions that are always wrong

You are talking out your ass here.

When the President (or any officer or employee of the executive branch), through action or inaction, delays or withholds enacted funding, that is an impoundment.

Congress holds the power of the purse—approving a budget and appropriating funds. The President and executive branch agencies are responsible for administering those funds.

Occasionally, the President may wish to delay or avoid spending some of the funds appropriated by Congress. This may be for a variety of reasons—for cost savings, policy disagreements between the President and Congress, and changes in relevant circumstances, to name a few.

https://www.gao.gov/legal/appropriations-law/impoundment-control-act

Congress passed the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 in response to the controversy. Title X in the act is commonly referred to as the Impoundment Control Act (or ICA), and it requires the president to report to Congress when he impounds funds as a deferment (or a temporary delay) or a recission (a permanent cancellation) of spending.

Under the ICA, spending deferrals must not extend beyond the current fiscal year, and Congress can override deferrals using an expedited process. For recissions, the president must propose such actions to Congress for approval, and he can delay spending-related to recissions for 45 days. Unless Congress approves the recission request, the funds must be released for spending.

Can a president refuse to spend funds approved by Congress? | Constitution Center

Shortly after President Donald Trump took office, his administration briefly paused federal spending on various programs. Although that spending has been restored, the move led to questions about the separation of powers between the president and Congress.

constitutioncenter.org

When TA's losing an argument he starts making shit up.

Read my answer here.

 

[Jake Starkey]

The courts in the regions will rule very quickly because every region knew this was going to happen.

They are prepared and will file quickly.

 

[Damocles]

Nope. As usual you're talking out you white supremacist ass. Trump can't make that determination. He's not a king.

That's not a "king" thing, it is an executive thing though. It's his job to execute the law, if the law says the money is only to be given if they "do this" then he absolutely can and should withhold the cash if they do not "do this".

 

[archives]

Things are about to get real serious here. Blue states and localities that are declared sanctuary locations will lose all federal funding starting February 1. Yea, I can see these places suing and judge shopping to stop that, but with district court judges unable to hand down nationwide injunctions, it's not going to be very effective or fast. I also suspect these places won't have a strong case to make about why they should continue to receive funding.

https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/13/white-house-end-funding-sanctuary-cities-states-00726557?vct=74.167

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5688157-donald-trump-sanctuary-city-funding/

Trump to cut federal payments to sanctuary cities starting Feb 1 over immigration policies

President Donald Trump will suspend payments to sanctuary cities starting Feb. 1. He also criticized Minnesota officials over alleged widespread fraud.

www.foxnews.com

I think the Biden administration started an unnecessary shit storm of backlash on illegal immigration by effectively opening the borders and doubling (or more) the number of illegals in the US. I don't think the Leftists in Biden's administration--who were running the show--had the first clue that if Trump got reelected something like this would happen. They expected their mass influx of illegals to simply be accepted.

Already in the Courts

 

[archives]

That's not a "king" thing, it is an executive thing though. It's his job to execute the law, if the law says the money is only to be given if they "do this" then he absolutely can and should withhold the cash if they do not "do this".

You sure about that, that the Executive Branch can’t reallocate fundings passed and approved by the Legislative Branch?

If so, where do you draw the line?

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Already in the Courts

And, the cases I've seen rely heavily on shopped pro-sanctuary / anti-Trump / Democrat Leftist friendly judges to make rulings. The danger here is that these cases will go to the Supreme Court and get shot down. That pretty much ends the argument.

It would likely be easier for blue states and sanctuary locations to simply cooperate fully with ICE. Some battles aren't worth fighting and I see this as one of them. But then again, the Left isn't exactly the sharpest tool in the shed in picking fights.

 

[Althea]

Things are about to get real serious here. Blue states and localities that are declared sanctuary locations will lose all federal funding starting February 1. Yea, I can see these places suing and judge shopping to stop that, but with district court judges unable to hand down nationwide injunctions, it's not going to be very effective or fast. I also suspect these places won't have a strong case to make about why they should continue to receive funding.

https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/13/white-house-end-funding-sanctuary-cities-states-00726557?vct=74.167

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5688157-donald-trump-sanctuary-city-funding/

Trump to cut federal payments to sanctuary cities starting Feb 1 over immigration policies

President Donald Trump will suspend payments to sanctuary cities starting Feb. 1. He also criticized Minnesota officials over alleged widespread fraud.

www.foxnews.com

I think the Biden administration started an unnecessary shit storm of backlash on illegal immigration by effectively opening the borders and doubling (or more) the number of illegals in the US. I don't think the Leftists in Biden's administration--who were running the show--had the first clue that if Trump got reelected something like this would happen. They expected their mass influx of illegals to simply be accepted.

No. No he isn't. The courts will strike this one down just as they have EVERY OTHER ATTEMPT.

He simply does not have the ability to do this.

 

[LurchAddams]

That's not a "king" thing, it is an executive thing though. It's his job to execute the law, if the law says the money is only to be given if they "do this" then he absolutely can and should withhold the cash if they do not "do this".

Unless Congress officially submits it's oversight, it's not the president's call. This is vindictive Nazi shit.

 

[martin]

That's not a "king" thing, it is an executive thing though. It's his job to execute the law, if the law says the money is only to be given if they "do this" then he absolutely can and should withhold the cash if they do not "do this".

He's not himself the Justice Department. It's his job to follow the law, and he has lost at least once already on this issue.

Court rules Trump administration cannot withhold or freeze federal funding to cities and counties it labels as “sanctuary jurisdictions” - Public Rights Project

For immediate release: Aug. 22, 2025 Media contact: Jackie Jena, jackie@publicrightsproject.org OAKLAND, CA —...

www.publicrightsproject.org

 

[archives]

And, the cases I've seen rely heavily on shopped pro-sanctuary / anti-Trump / Democrat Leftist friendly judges to make rulings. The danger here is that these cases will go to the Supreme Court and get shot down. That pretty much ends the argument.

It would likely be easier for blue states and sanctuary locations to simply cooperate fully with ICE. Some battles aren't worth fighting and I see this as one of them. But then again, the Left isn't exactly the sharpest tool in the shed in picking fights.

Be at least a year if not longer before it hit the Supreme Court, and in that time the political environment could be radically different.

People aren’t protesting ICE, rather ICE’s Gestapo style technics, and Trump pimping the situation for his own political ends

 

[Damocles]

You sure about that, that the Executive Branch can’t reallocate fundings passed and approved by the Legislative Branch?

If so, where do you draw the line?

Read what I wrote again, because it has nothing to do with "reallocating" funds. You want to argue a point that has not been made because it would be real easy... However, everything is in writing and we can tell I didn't say that.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Unless Congress officially submits it's oversight, it's not the president's call. This is vindictive Nazi shit.

You obvious didn't read or are willfully ignorant of the information I posted. Trump can impound the funds, tell Congress he did it, and then it's up to Congress to decide what to do next. That could take months given how Congress operates.

 

[Nomad]

Trump’s Executive Actions Freezing Federal Funding, Explained

www.splcenter.org

 

[Into the Night]

This has the potential to make meaningful change. Blue state politicians are not going to cut back on spending. No federal funds, what will they have to do? Raise taxes. Democrats are great at spending everyone else's money. Until it actually has to come out of their pockets. If Trump can actually do this, I see a shit ton of useless democrat career politicians getting the boot. That can only be good.

Let's see...
McDonalds, In and Out burger, independent truckers, Walmart, Phillips petroleum, Apple, Del Monte, and many residents are fleeing the SDTC.
Also, several Amazon warehouses are also permanently closing.

There's a reason.

 

[Into the Night]

Explain how being a declared sanctuary city breaks the law and defies Congress?

Ignoring CFR Title 8.

And then explain where a POTUS is given the power of the purse to unilaterally take that action?

CFR Title 8.

And explain how the POTUS is not breaking the law by not delivering the money appropriated by Congress and allocated to the State?

Congress never authorized paying fraud money to States.
CFR Title 8.

 

[Kurmugeon]

It should have happened years ago.

-

 

[Jake Starkey]

Any war must be economic and from the air.

That alone will isolate Hamas, the Houthi, and Hezbollah from any funding.

We cannot win land wars in the Midde or Far East.

I said in 2004 that Iran would ally with Iraq eventually.

 

[IBDaMann]

Why do you think it would take judge shopping to stop that?

... because otherwise Trump has all executive power granted under Article II of the Constitution.

What, in the law do you think gives a POTUS power to unilaterally do that and defy Congress?

Article II of the Constitution, which gives Trump all executive power. Did you read that? ALL of it. Not just some of it ... ALL of it.

US Constitution - Article II. Section 1. The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.

Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.

 

[IBDaMann]

That alone will isolate Hamas, the Houthi, and Hezbollah from any funding.

What about Al Qassam?

 

[LurchAddams]

You obvious didn't read or are willfully ignorant of the information I posted. Trump can impound the funds, tell Congress he did it, and then it's up to Congress to decide what to do next. That could take months given how Congress operates.

Dude, when you know you're losing an argument, you start making shit up. I read every word you posted and understand it perfectly. And it's all bullshit.

Do try to be better.