Can Trump spark a seismic shift in crime-ridden blue state’s sanctuary insanity?



President Donald Trump's decisive victory in November appears to have caused a seismic shift in California's Democratic leaders' sanctuary rhetoric, clearing a path for conservative local politicians to ramp up their fight against the illegal immigration crisis.

As Americans rally behind Trump's immigration crackdown, Californians are becoming increasingly outraged by the state's existing crime surge, further worsened by sanctuary laws.

Trump and others continue to battle against those targeting Immigration and Customs Enforcement, but Democrats like Gov. Gavin Newsom — despite his recent attempts to reinvent himself as a moderate — keep thwarting those attempts with pro-sanctuary policies.

First-of-its-kind task force

Several local leaders have seized the opportunity to right the course and address the state's illegal immigration chaos.

United States Attorney for the Central District of California Bill Essayli announced Monday the formation of a new task force dedicated to eradicating the state's destructive sanctuary laws.

'The days of giving criminal illegal aliens a free pass are over.'

Operation Guardian Angel, a program launched May 10 alongside federal partners, aims to "neutralize California's sanctuary state policy and protect Americans from criminal illegal aliens incarcerated in county jails by issuing federal arrest warrants for them," according to a Department of Justice press release.

The task force comprises assets from multiple federal agencies, including ICE, Homeland Security Investigations, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Border Patrol, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives.

RELATED: Sheriff vows to break California's sanctuary law by alerting ICE about violent illegal aliens

California Governor Gavin Newsom. Photo by ARIANA DREHSLER/AFP via Getty Images

The press release noted that Essayli's district is home to approximately 1.5 million illegal aliens, including gang members and violent felons.

As of May 15, the program has already resulted in the arrest of 13 individuals by filing complaints and arrest warrants, allowing federal authorities to seize custody of defendants in state jails. The task force scans criminal databases every day to identify illegal aliens currently detained. An arrest warrant is then issued for those who can be transferred to DOJ custody for illegal re-entry before they are released from local jails.

Essayli slammed California's sanctuary laws for releasing "even the worst criminal aliens" back onto the street.

"These laws effectively render federal immigration detainers meaningless," he stated. "The days of giving criminal illegal aliens a free pass are over. While California may be presently disregarding detainers, it cannot ignore federal arrest warrants."

Essayli said in a statement to Fox News that the state's sanctuary laws "made it almost impossible for ICE to do their job, issue detainers, and get criminal illegal immigrants out of jails."

He declared, "We're going to flood the system with warrants for criminal illegal immigration that are in county jails, they can ignore a detainer, but they cannot ignore a criminal arrest warrant."

Essayli referred to California as the "testing ground" for the groundbreaking new program that could be implemented in other sanctuary jurisdictions.

He noted that he does not expect resistance from local authorities.

"They have no choice, they will comply. And if they don't comply, if they interfere in our ability to arrest a federal felon, they can expect to face consequences for that," Essayli added to Fox.

Jessica Vaughan, the director of policy studies for the Center for Immigration Studies, told Blaze News that federal judges' criminal arrest warrants "cannot be ignored" and "are exempt from the sanctuary policies."

While Vaughan stated that she has not seen any indication that local politicians are shifting their stance on sanctuary policies, she highlighted efforts to arrest illegal aliens who were previously deported.

"ICE has taken steps to make it easier for California law enforcement agencies, most of whom have always supported cooperation with ICE, to transfer custody of certain illegal aliens who have been arrested that ICE is seeking to remove," she explained. "I'm sure most of the sheriffs and police chiefs will be fine with this arrangement."

When reached for comment, Essayli's office referred Blaze News to the previous statement in the press release and those provided to Fox News.

Local law enforcement digs in

Some of California's local law enforcement leaders have also led the charge against the sanctuary policies.

San Diego County Sheriff Kelly Martinez came under fire late last year when she stated that her office would not comply with the San Diego County Board's decision to pass its own sanctuary measure, in addition to the state's existing policies.

Martinez's office previously told Blaze News that it would not be "expanding or changing anything we have been doing."

"We will continue to follow state law and maintain the way we have been operating for several years. The Board Action sought to impose restrictions well beyond those already provided for in-state law regarding how local law enforcement can work with immigration officials," the sheriff's office said.

However, Martinez's office stopped short of rejecting all sanctuary policies, instead stating that the "current state law strikes the right balance between limiting local law enforcement's cooperation with immigration authorities, ensuring public safety, and building community trust."

While Martinez's office has stood behind California's sanctuary laws, Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, a 2026 gubernatorial candidate, has come out in full force against the state, becoming the first and only sheriff to join Huntington Beach's lawsuit against California, Newsom, and Attorney General Robert Bonta.

In January, the city council members declared Huntington Beach a "non-sanctuary city," then later filed a lawsuit claiming the state's laws "drastically limit local law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement authorities, shield illegal aliens, and threaten public safety."

Bianco told the Desert Sun, "Local law enforcement has not and does not enforce immigration law."

He argued that California's sanctuary policy "was only designed to protect criminals in jail from being deported."

RELATED: The Trump effect? Newsom pledges to veto Dem bill that would expand protections for illegal aliens

Sheriff Chad Bianco of Riverside County. Photo by Kent Nishimura/Getty Images

Vaughan told Blaze News that California sheriffs resisting local politicians' efforts to impose stricter sanctuary laws "should feel a bit safer doing this knowing that the Trump administration will support them."

'This is a battle that needs to be fought, both for supremacy of the federal government on immigration enforcement and for the sake of public safety.'

In response to the lawsuit, Bonta's office previously told Fox News Digital, "The Attorney General is committed to protecting and ensuring the rights of California's immigrant communities and upholding vital laws like SB 54, which ensure that state and local resources go toward fighting crime in California communities, not toward federal immigration enforcement."

"Our office successfully fought back against a challenge to SB 54 by the first Trump administration, and we are prepared to vigorously defend SB 54 again," the statement added.

Bianco's office did not respond to a request for comment from Blaze News.

Recalls and electoral shifts

California locals' frustration with Democratic policies appeared to reach a tipping point late last year when several recall efforts successfully booted radical leftists.

In Alameda County, an area so devastated by crime that numerous businesses fled, voters removed two George Soros-backed politicians: then-Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao (D) and then-Alameda County District Attorney Pamela Price (D).

A similar situation played out in Los Angeles County.

After weathering failed recall efforts, former Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón suffered a blistering loss in his November re-election bid.

The progressive DA was replaced by Nathan Hochman, an Independent candidate who ran on the promise to restore safety and prioritize "protecting victims' interests."

Hochman, a former Republican, shared a post on social media on May 18 stating that "the fun is over" for illegal alien criminals.

"I am standing at the border between LA County and San Bernardino County where criminals used to enjoy crossing in the LA direction, thinking that little to no consequences would occur if they stole, robbed, and engaged in criminal conduct," he wrote.

"Times have changed!" Hochman declared. "A new DA was elected. And criminals in LA County will now be prosecuted and held fully accountable for their illegal actions."

Hochman's office did not respond to a request for comment from Blaze News.

What's next?

While it remains uncertain whether the quieted pro-sanctuary rhetoric during Trump's second term, coupled with mounting frustrations over surging crime, will ultimately eradicate sanctuary policies, it offers California's dissenting local leaders with a rare opportunity they will either seize or risk losing through inaction.

"The real test will be when the Trump administration begins imposing penalties on California, such as denying certain funding, and possibly takes legal action to challenge some of the more egregious local policies," Vaughan stated.

"This is a battle that needs to be fought, both for supremacy of the federal government on immigration enforcement and for the sake of public safety," she remarked.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

'Don't Mass up New Hampshire': NH takes critical step to avoid fate of neighboring sanctuary cesspools



Sanctuary jurisdictions have sprouted up in many areas around the nation and, in many cases, created an undesired spillover effect for neighboring communities that reject such policies.

New Hampshire has grappled with this issue due to Democratic leaders in Massachusetts implementing measures to shield illegal aliens, including criminals, from federal immigration authorities.

'I'm very glad to see New Hampshire setting the standard for the rest of New England.'

Massachusetts' shelter system became overrun and a hotspot for criminal activity amid the Biden administration's illegal immigration crisis. With limited shelter space available, many homeless individuals and families slept on the floor of the Boston Logan International Airport.

RELATED: Blaze News original: Inside Massachusetts migrant shelters where crime flourishes under Democrats' watch

Jodi Hilton for The Washington Post via Getty Images

On Thursday, New Hampshire Governor Kelly Ayotte (R) drew a line in the sand by signing into law House Bill 511 and Senate Bill 62, which place a ban on sanctuary cities and support cooperation between local authorities and federal immigration enforcement.

Ayotte channeled her former campaign slogan, "Don't Mass up New Hampshire," in a statement regarding the new law.

"I said from the beginning that we won't let our state go the way of Massachusetts and their billion-dollar illegal immigrant crisis," Ayotte stated on Thursday. "Today, we're delivering on our promise by banning sanctuary cities and supporting law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration authorities. New Hampshire will never be a sanctuary for criminals, and we will keep working every day to remain the safest state in the nation."

Ayotte told Fox News Digital, "New Hampshire is ranked the safest state in the nation, and I was glad I was able to sign the bill banning sanctuary cities to make sure we remain that way."

Thursday's action made New Hampshire the first state in New England to ban sanctuary jurisdictions.

RELATED: Massachusetts frees illegal alien child rape suspects on low bail as Mayor Wu doubles down on sanctuary laws

New Hampshire Governor Kelly Ayotte. Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Blaze News asked New Hampshire state Rep. Mike Belcher (R) for his reaction to the new law.

"I'm very glad to see New Hampshire setting the standard for the rest of New England. It's only a shame that we can't keep them [sanctuary cities] out of the rest of New England. So it's going to continue impacting us, but it's a start," Belcher said.

"We need to take a hard look at what is legitimate asylum and what is not, and maintain an America First policy," he continued. "I think as long as the federal government is properly enforcing good law, we should do everything we can to assist with that. Where they fail to do so, the states should pick it up and do it on their own because we have the right to do that as well."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump to crush sanctuary cities shielding illegal aliens



President Donald Trump is expected to sign an executive order on Monday afternoon that would further crack down on sanctuary cities shielding illegal aliens from federal law enforcement officers.

Early Monday morning, press secretary Karoline Leavitt announced during a press briefing that the president planned to sign two new executive orders.

'It's quite simple: Obey the law, respect the law, and don't obstruct federal immigration officials and law enforcement officials when they are simply trying to remove public safety threats from our nation's communities.'

She told reporters, "Today, we kick off 100-Day Week with a focus on the president's historic effort to secure our southern border. Later this afternoon, President Trump will sign an executive order on law and order and another executive order on sanctuary cities."

"The first EO will strengthen and unleash America's law enforcement to pursue criminals and protect innocent citizens," she continued. "The second EO is centered around protecting American communities from criminal aliens, and it will direct the attorney general and secretary of Homeland Security to publish a list of state and local jurisdictions that obstruct the enforcement of federal immigration laws."

— (@)

Leavitt slammed the Biden administration's "awful open-border policies" for allowing over 10 million illegal aliens to "invade" the country.

During a separate news conference — the White House's first new media press briefing — Leavitt highlighted Trump's border accomplishments during his first 100 days and elaborated on the upcoming EOs.

She noted that between Inauguration Day and April 1, only nine illegal aliens were released into the country, "a staggering 99.99% decrease from more than the 184,000 illegal aliens who were released into the country under Joe Biden during that same period last year," Leavitt said.

The press secretary explained that the administration would review the sanctuary city list created by Attorney General Pam Bondi and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to determine whether those jurisdictions were breaking any federal laws.

"Then, the Office of Management and Budget is going to look at their federal spending. Again, if you're defying federal law, you are threatening your own federal spending by doing that," Leavitt added.

Trump's anti-sanctuary EO will also authorize Bondi to pursue potential criminal and civil suits against those who obstruct "criminal or immigration law enforcement."

"It's quite simple: Obey the law, respect the law, and don't obstruct federal immigration officials and law enforcement officials when they are simply trying to remove public safety threats from our nation's communities," Leavitt said.

She noted that the law and order EO would ensure that Immigration and Customs Enforcement can coordinate with local law enforcement partners. It allows authorities to "pursue legal action against state or local officials obstructing criminal or immigration law enforcement," according to a document reviewed by the New York Post.

Border czar Tom Homan joined Leavitt during the first press conference. He was asked to share his message to sanctuary communities.

"I don't think any elected mayor, any elected governor should want public safety threats — those illegally in the United States — public safety threats walking through the community," he stated.

Homan later told ABC News that the executive order addressing sanctuary cities is "needed."

"Sanctuary cities are sanctuaries for criminals," he remarked.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

New York City Council sues to shield illegal aliens from ICE's return to Rikers Island



The New York City Council filed a lawsuit on Tuesday against Mayor Eric Adams (D) to prevent Immigration and Customs Enforcement from returning to Rikers Island.

Last week, Adams' first deputy mayor, Randy Mastro, issued an executive order allowing ICE to occupy office space at Rikers Island, the site of a prison managed by the city's Department of Correction.

'While we will review the lawsuit, this one seems baseless and contrary to the public interest in protecting New Yorkers from violent criminals.'

ICE was previously booted from the area in 2014 after then-Mayor Bill de Blasio (D) formalized New York City's sanctuary policy protecting illegal aliens ultimately at the expense of public safety.

Mastro's action indicated that there is a "critical" need for federal law enforcement officers' presence on the island to enable them to share intelligence with the DOC and the New York Police Department, particularly to curb "criminal gang activity."

The order stated, "The safety of the City of New York has been jeopardized by violent transnational gangs and criminal enterprises — including transnational gangs such as MS-13 and Tren de Aragua — that have been designated by federal authorities as foreign terrorist organizations."

"There is historical precedent for federal law enforcement authorities to have office space and personnel on Rikers Island as recently as a decade ago," it read.

Adams' administration noted that ICE's return to Rikers Island would not conflict with the city's sanctuary laws because it allows the agency to coordinate only on criminal investigations and not civil matters.

The council's lawsuit argues that Mastro lacked the authority to issue the order, further citing that he failed to first complete a "meaningful independent analysis."

Additionally, the council claims that the action was tied to an alleged "corrupt bargain" between Adams and the Trump administration to have the criminal case against him dropped. Adams and the White House have denied any allegations of a quid pro quo.

"The 'purchase price' — which was agreed to in advance and is now being proffered — is the safety and well-being of immigrant communities and all New Yorkers whose rights are protected by our city's prized sanctuary law," the lawsuit reads.

City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams, who is running against Mayor Adams in the upcoming election, stated, "Once again, this City Council is standing firm to protect the rights and safety of all New Yorkers against attacks by the Trump administration — because the city's mayor won't stop placing his own personal interests ahead of the people of our city."

"New York cannot afford its mayor colluding with the Trump administration to violate the law, and this lawsuit looks to the court to uphold the basic standard of democracy, even if our mayor won't," she added.

Kayla Mamelak Altus, a spokesperson for the mayor, told the Gothamist that Mastro's executive action "is expressly authorized by New York City's local laws — the very laws enacted by the City Council."

She noted that Mastro "independently concluded that a federal presence at Rikers to conduct federal criminal investigations is in New York City's best interest and protects public safety, particularly in our ongoing efforts to target violent transnational gangs now present in our city, including those designated as terrorist organizations."

"While we will review the lawsuit, this one seems baseless and contrary to the public interest in protecting New Yorkers from violent criminals," Mamelak Altus added.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

CCP-linked donor helped Boston Mayor Wu's campaign raise $300K: Report



A donor with ties to the Chinese Communist Party reportedly helped Boston Mayor Michelle Wu's (D) 2021 campaign raise $300,000.

The Daily Caller News Foundation reported Monday that Gary Yu, the founder of Boston International Media Consulting, helped Wu's mayoral campaign raise hundreds of thousands of dollars "from the Chinese American community."

'Wu's ultra-leftism makes her the perfect candidate for CCP recruitment and capture.'

Yu's consulting group focuses on "public relations, event planning, [and] media promotion for Chinese companies" seeking to advertise in North America, according to the company's LinkedIn page.

The DCNF claimed that Yu has ties to the CCP, reporting that he is "listed as an official" with the United Front Work Department, a CCP agency.

"China uses 'United Front' work to co-opt and neutralize sources of potential opposition to the policies and authority of its ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP)," according to the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. "The CCP's United Front Work Department (UFWD)—the agency responsible for coordinating these kinds of influence operations—mostly focuses on the management of potential opposition groups inside China, but it also has an important foreign influence mission."

Yu also works as a U.S. talent recruiter for "at least half a dozen Chinese regional governments," according to reports reviewed by DCNF.

Gordon Chang, an author and China expert, told the news outlet, "The Communist Party's UFWD never rests."

"There is no ethnic Chinese official in America who is not targeted. It's time for law enforcement to investigate the CCP's ties to Gary Yu and Yu's ties to Mayor Michelle Wu," Chang added.

"Wu's ultra-leftism makes her the perfect candidate for CCP recruitment and capture," he continued. "Or do we have it backward? Is her ultra-leftism the result of CCP recruitment and capture? More than just the people of Boston would like to know."

Since 2018, Yu has personally donated $45,515 to local Democratic politicians, including $3,200 to Wu, $2,175 to Governor Maura Healey, and $3,000 to State Auditor Diana DiZoglio, according to records from the Massachusetts Office of Campaign and Political Finance.

Wu, Yu, Healey, DiZoglio, and Boston International Media Consulting did not respond to the DCNF's requests for comment.

Last month, Wu and several other sanctuary mayors were referred to the Department of Justice for a criminal investigation for allegedly harboring illegal aliens.

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) submitted the criminal referral following a House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearing where the mayors were pressed about the impact of their cities' policies.

Wu faced public backlash for dishing out $650,000 in taxpayer funds to prepare for the hearing. Amid the scrutiny, she doubled down on her decision.

"It is money that I very, very much wish we did not have to spend at all, and time from my staff and team that could have gone to much better, much more important things. But the stakes are high," Wu stated.

During a March 19 State of the City address, Wu defended Boston's policies and criticized President Donald Trump for his stand on illegal immigration.

"No one tells Boston how to take care of our own, not kings, and not presidents who think they are kings. Boston was born facing down bullies," she stated.

Then addressing migrants, she added, "You belong here."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

House GOP calls 'sanctuary' governors to face oversight grilling on public safety



House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) sent letters to several "sanctuary governors" on Thursday, inviting them to testify before lawmakers as part of the committee's ongoing probe into the public safety impact of sanctuary policies.

Comer requested Democratic Governors Kathy Hochul of New York, Tim Walz of Minnesota, and JB Pritzker of Illinois testify before the committee during a May 15 hearing.

'President Trump is preparing to take executive action to withhold federal funding from sanctuary states.'

The letters stated, "The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is continuing to investigate sanctuary jurisdictions across the United States and their impact on public safety and the effectiveness of federal efforts to enforce the immigration laws of the United States."

"Sanctuary jurisdictions and their obstructionist policies hinder the ability of federal law enforcement officers to effectuate safe arrests and remove dangerous criminals from American communities," it continued. "This threatens Americans' safety."

Comer requested several documents from the state leaders, including all materials and communications related to sanctuary policies.

The committee previously heard testimony in March from Democratic mayors of sanctuary cities, including Eric Adams of New York, Michelle Wu of Boston, Brandon Johnson of Chicago, and Mike Johnston of Denver.

Comer stated Thursday, "Harboring aliens is a federal crime. Sanctuary policies championed by these governors jeopardize the safety of Americans and defy U.S. immigration laws."

"President Trump is preparing to take executive action to withhold federal funding from sanctuary states," he added. "Working alongside President Trump, Congress must ensure federal immigration law is enforced and that criminal aliens are swiftly removed from our communities."

Hochul indicated that she would be willing to testify, Politico reported.

She told reporters on Thursday, "We just received notification of their interest in my opinion on state laws, which I'm happy to share with them."

"I told people like Tom Homan that I will continue doing what our practice has been from the beginning, which is to cooperate with ICE when they have a warrant or they have evidence that there's a person who's committed a serious crime," Hochul said.

According to Alex Gough, a spokesperson for Pritzker, the governor is still reviewing Comer's request for documents. He has not yet determined whether he will testify.

Gough stated, "Let's call this what this is: another partisan dog and pony show."

Teddy Tschann, a spokesperson for Walz, said, "Governor Walz is happy to work with Congress, but since Minnesota is not a sanctuary state, one can't help but wonder if this is, perhaps, politically motivated."

Meanwhile, acting U.S. District Attorney for New Jersey Alina Habba announced that she is launching her own investigation into Governor Phil Murphy (D) and state attorney General Matt Platkin over New Jersey’s order prohibiting local police from cooperating with federal immigration agents.

"That will no longer stand. [U.S. Attorney General] Pam Bondi has made it clear and so has our president that we are to take all criminals, violent criminals and criminals out of this country and to completely enforce federal law," Habba told Fox News' Sean Hannity on Thursday.

"And anybody who does get ... in the way of what we are doing — which is not political, it is simply against crime — will be charged in the state of New Jersey for obstruction, for concealment," Habba continued. "And I will come after hard."

Murphy's office and Platkin's office declined a request for comment from ABC News.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Denver mayor used auto-delete messaging platform to have secret talks about migrant crisis



Democratic Denver Mayor Mike Johnston and his team used Signal, a messaging application with an auto-delete feature, to have secret communications about the sanctuary city's immigration crisis.

KCNC-TV revealed the scandal in a Thursday report, explaining that the mayor and 14 of his senior advisers, appointees, and lawyers created a "Strike Force" group on the application to have sensitive discussions that would otherwise have been accessible to the public through open records requests. Instead, the end-to-end encryption software and its auto-delete feature concealed their communications.

'Giving the impression that we are doing something we don't want the public to see.'

Joshua Posner, the mayor's director of strategic initiatives, sent a text message on January 15 to several administration members instructing them to move their conversations about immigration to Signal, KCNC reported.

Posner wrote, "We are going to use Signal to communicate with Strike Force so that communication remains encrypted and secure (and messages auto delete.)"

He proceeded to explain to the mayor's team how to download the application to their phones.

Steven Zansberg, a Denver attorney, told KCNC that the actions of the mayor and his administration were "unlawful."

"It deprives us of the rights we have as Coloradans to observe the conduct of public business," he stated, noting that three years is the "standard records retention requirement."

"It seems like a pretty plain, straightforward, deliberate effort to evade transparency," Zansberg concluded.

Jeff Roberts, director of the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition, also argued that the move undermined that state's open records law.

"This is not transparent," Roberts told the news outlet. "They are giving the impression that we are doing something we don't want the public to see. The city is saying at the get-go, 'These are records the public should never see.'"

When confronted about the messaging scandal, Johnston's office blamed President Donald Trump's administration.

Jordan Fuja, a spokesperson for the mayor, told KCNC, "When President Trump took office in January, it was clear that there would be rapidly developing changes to the way the federal government interacts with cities that could have significant impacts on how Denver operates. The particular group was started in January for internal staff to easily keep track of and share information regarding federal actions that impact Denver under the new administration."

Fuja argued, "The City retention schedule does not obligate city employees to retain electronic mail messages."

KCNC reported that the city confirmed Signal messages were set to auto-delete from January 15 to January 29, after which the feature was disabled.

The decision to move the communication to Signal came just weeks after America First Legal requested that Johnston's administration turn over communications related to immigration issues.

AFL demanded "all records, including communications, calendar entries, and documents mentioning or belonging to Mike Johnston, Mayor since November 1, 2024."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Blaze News original: 5 times Democrats ignored courts — but no 'constitutional crisis' cries back then



Democratic politicians are up in arms over the Trump administration's decision to freeze federal funding despite a court order from U.S. District Judge John McConnell of Rhode Island.

McConnell accused the administration of defying his January 31 order to continue the funding in response to a lawsuit filed by Democratic attorneys general in 22 states and Washington, D.C.

'They have clearly overstepped their boundaries, but unlike the other two branches, they have "neither force nor will" to effectuate their usurpations.'

The judge claimed the Trump administration "continued to improperly freeze federal funds and refused to resume disbursement of appropriated federal funds."

On Monday, McConnell ordered the administration to comply with his previous order.

"The broad categorical and sweeping freeze of federal funds is, as the Court found, likely unconstitutional and has caused and continues to cause irreparable harm to a vast portion of this country," the district judge wrote.

Democratic politicians and the corporate media were in lockstep this week, parroting the claim that the Trump administration's actions amount to a "constitutional crisis."

However, neither the Democratic Party nor its media allies expressed such concerns in the past when left-wing politicians ignored and even, in some cases, blatantly defied court orders.

1. Biden buys votes with student loan scheme

In June 2023, the Supreme Court struck down former President Joe Biden's sweeping federal student loan "forgiveness" plan, declaring it unconstitutional. The initiative would have eliminated $10,000 of debt for individual borrowers earning less than $125,000 per year and married couples earning less than $250,000 per year. An additional $10,000 would have been zeroed out for Pell Grant borrowers.

The plan would have cost American taxpayers roughly $430 billion.

The Supreme Court justices determined in a 6-3 vote that the Biden administration overstepped its authority with the unconstitutional student loan debt cancellation plan.

Additionally, two reports from the Government Accountability Office found that Biden's student loan cancellation program automatically approved borrowers without proper vetting and failed to implement fraud protection safeguards.

Despite the Supreme Court's ruling and the GAO's findings, the Biden administration decided to move forward with its pledge to cancel federal student loan debt.

The administration rolled out a series of similar but smaller initiatives.

In February 2024, Biden boasted about his attempts to circumvent the Supreme Court's decision.

"Early in my term, I announced a major plan to provide millions of working families with debt relief for their college student debt," he stated. "Tens of millions of people in debt were literally about to be canceled in debts. But my MAGA Republican friends in the Congress, elected officials, and special interests stepped in and sued us. And the Supreme Court blocked it."

"But that didn't stop me," Biden declared. "I announced we're going to pursue alternative paths for student debt relief for as many borrowers as possible."

2. Biden's CDC tramples property rights during COVID era

In 2020, Congress passed the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, which included "a 120-day moratorium on eviction filings as well as other protections for tenants in certain rental properties with federal assistance or federally related financing."

When Congress chose not to extend the moratorium, the Biden administration's Centers for Disease Control and Prevention attempted to step in. It ordered a halt on evictions that broadly included all residential properties in the country and imposed criminal penalties for those who violated the order.

Congress extended the CDC's order for an additional month. However, when that expired, the agency issued a second extension. Initially set to expire in March 2021, the extension was prolonged multiple times, with the final expiration date set for July 2021.

In June 2021, the Supreme Court considered the CDC's order and ultimately allowed it to stand because it was slated to expire in a few weeks, allowing time for Congress to distribute rental assistance funds.

However, Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote, "I agree with the District Court and the applicants that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention exceeded its existing statutory authority by issuing a nationwide eviction moratorium."

He noted that further extensions would need to be issued by Congress.

Biden's CDC ignored the court's opinion, issuing another order in August 2021, attempting to extend the expired eviction moratorium to residential properties in communities with "substantial" and "high" levels of COVID-19 transmission. However, the order was blocked by the Supreme Court.

Again, the justices wrote, "The CDC has exceeded its authority."

"It would be one thing if Congress had specifically authorized the action that the CDC has taken. But that has not happened," the order read.

3. Bucks County Democrat pledges to count illegal votes

Bucks County Board of Commissioners Chair Diane Ellis-Marseglia, a Democrat, boasted that she planned to count illegal ballots in Pennsylvania's Senate race between incumbent Bob Casey (D) and Dave McCormick (R) in November.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ordered that undated and misdated mail ballots could not be counted.

Ellis-Marseglia stated that she planned to count the ballots despite the court's order.

"People violate laws any time they want," she said. "So for me, if I violate this law, it's because I want a court to pay attention. There's nothing more important than counting votes."

After Ellis-Marseglia's comments, the state's supreme court ordered a second time that such ballots could not be counted.

Fierce community blowback prompted Ellis-Marseglia to quickly backpedal on her earlier comments. She claimed that her words were taken out of context.

She issued what appeared to be a half-hearted and insincere apology, arguing that many were unaware that she was referring to provisional, not mail-in, ballots.

Many Bucks County residents attended the subsequent commissioners' meeting to demand Ellis-Marseglia's immediate resignation.

Ellis-Marseglia was elected in 2007 and remains on the board.

4. Sanctuary city mayors shield illegal aliens

In President Donald Trump's first administration, he issued an executive order in January 2017, "Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States," that sought to prevent sanctuary jurisdictions from thwarting federal immigration enforcement measures.

As part of Trump's executive action, he aimed to pull federal funding from jurisdictions that failed to comply with immigration laws.

"It is the policy of the executive branch to ensure, to the fullest extent of the law, that a State, or a political subdivision of a State, shall comply with 8 U.S.C. 1373," it read. "In furtherance of this policy, the Attorney General and the Secretary, in their discretion and to the extent consistent with law, shall ensure that jurisdictions that willfully refuse to comply with 8 U.S.C. 1373 (sanctuary jurisdictions) are not eligible to receive Federal grants, except as deemed necessary for law enforcement purposes by the Attorney General or the Secretary."

8 U.S.C. § 1373 states, "Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal, State, or local law, a Federal, State, or local government entity or official may not prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual."

It also prohibits federal, state, and local laws from restricting the exchange of immigration status information with "any other Federal, State, or local government entity."

In 2003, the Immigration and Naturalization Service mentioned in the law was broken up into three federal agencies: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and Customs and Border Protection.

Trump's executive order to withhold federal funding from sanctuary jurisdictions faced many legal challenges during his first term, and the courts blocked it. However, sanctuary cities were ordered to comply with 8 U.S.C. § 1373.

Regardless, cities like Chicago, New York City, and many others continue to shield illegal aliens from federal immigration agents.

5. Cuomo attacks religious freedom

In October 2020, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat, rolled out strict lockdown measures, claiming they would stop the spread of COVID-19.

The heavy-handed restrictions limited church capacity in Brooklyn and Queens, neighborhoods experiencing high infection rates at the time. Churches in so-called "red zones" were prohibited from hosting more than 10 attendees, while "orange zones" were limited to 25.

Cuomo's executive order prompted several religious groups — the Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn and two Orthodox Jewish congregations — to file a lawsuit against the city.

Rabbi David Zwiebel of Agudath Israel of America called the restrictions "very devastating to communities of faith."

The lawsuit argued that Cuomo's restrictions discriminated against religious practices while allowing higher capacity limits for so-called "essential" business. The groups further contended that the First Amendment protected their religious freedoms.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favor of the religious organizations.

Cuomo responded by calling the ruling "irrelevant."

"It's irrelevant from any practical impact because the zone that they were talking about has already been moot," he stated. "I think this was really just an opportunity for the court to express its philosophy and politics."

Executive branch under siege

Democratic leaders invested considerable time and effort in thwarting Trump's first administration, and his second term is already shaping up to follow a similar pattern.

Attempts have been made to block Trump's executive order to end birthright citizenship. On Tuesday, a federal judge ordered the administration to restore the websites of the CDC and the FDA after they were taken offline to remove references to radical, woke gender ideology. Congressional Democrats have also tried to slow-walk the confirmation of Trump's Cabinet nominees.

These actions paint a picture of an executive branch battling a growing trend of encroachment by other branches of government.

GianCarlo Canaparo, a senior legal fellow in the Heritage Foundation's Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, told Blaze News, "American government no longer respects the separation of powers that the Founders envisioned."

"On the one hand, Congress has improperly given legislative power to the executive, and on the other judges too often interfere with the executive's proper powers," Canaparo stated. "I would like to see Congress take back its legislative power from the president and for the president to be able to exercise his executive powers free from unconstitutional restraints."

Daniel Horowitz, host of the Blaze Media podcast "Conservative Review with Daniel Horowitz," told Blaze News, "There is no way a Democrat president would tolerate a court dictating that they must have information about abstinence education on their website."

"Courts rule on ordinary civil and criminal litigation. They do not set broad policy over issues affecting the whole of the people, and they do not dictate appropriations, personnel decisions, which data Trump's staff can access, and how they run their websites," Horowitz continued. "They have clearly overstepped their boundaries, but unlike the other two branches, they have 'neither force nor will' to effectuate their usurpations."

"Democrats have already plowed the ground of demonstrating how impotent a judge is in determining political decisions, and Trump should apply the same standard. What's next? Will a judge put an injunction on Trump's ultimatum to Hamas?" Horowitz added.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump's DOJ sues Chicago over sanctuary city laws 'thwarting' ICE



President Donald Trump's Department of Justice has ramped up its efforts to dismantle sanctuary laws by filing a lawsuit on Thursday against Illinois, Cook County, and Chicago that alleges their policies "impede" federal immigration enforcement.

The complaint also named Governor J.B. Pritzker, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, and other local officials.

'The conduct of officials in Chicago and Illinois minimally enforcing — and oftentimes affirmatively thwarting — federal immigration laws ... has resulted in countless criminals being released.'

Specifically, the DOJ accused the Illinois TRUST Act, the Chicago Welcoming City ordinance, and the Way Forward Act of hindering Immigration and Customs Enforcement's efforts to detain and deport illegal aliens.

The Illinois TRUST Act, signed into law in 2017, says, "State law does not currently grant State or local law enforcement the authority to enforce federal civil immigration laws." It includes a "prohibition on enforcing federal civil immigration laws."

"A law enforcement agency or law enforcement official shall not detain or continue to detain any individual solely on the basis of any immigration detainer or civil immigration warrant or otherwise comply with an immigration detainer or civil immigration warrant," it reads.

Chicago's Welcoming City ordinance was passed in 2012 by former Mayor Rahm Emanuel (D).

The ordinance states that city agencies and agents cannot "arrest, detain, or continue to detain a person solely on the belief that the person is not present legally in the United States."

Both laws prevent local jurisdictions from honoring ICE detainers, which request that a criminal illegal alien currently in local custody be held up to 48 hours beyond their release date to allow immigration officials to safely transfer the individual to federal custody.

The Way Forward Act was enacted in 2021 and amended the TRUST Act to provide additional protection to illegal aliens. It states that "a law enforcement agency or law enforcement official may not inquire about or investigate the citizenship or immigration status or place of birth of any individual in the agency or official's custody or who has otherwise been stopped or detained by the agency or official."

The DOJ's lawsuit claimed that the state and local laws are "designed to and in fact interfere with and discriminate against the Federal Government's enforcement of federal immigration law in violation of the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution."

The agency further stated that the policies "obstruct the Federal Government's enforcement of federal immigration law" and "impede consultation and communication between federal, state, and local law enforcement officials that is necessary for federal officials to carry out federal immigration law and keep Americans safe."

It continued, "Upon information and belief, the conduct of officials in Chicago and Illinois minimally enforcing — and oftentimes affirmatively thwarting — federal immigration laws over a period of years has resulted in countless criminals being released into Chicago who should have been held for immigration removal from the United States."

The complaint accused sanctuary jurisdictions of effectively being "safe havens" for criminal illegal aliens seeking to evade federal law enforcement agents.

It argued that the laws prevent ICE and the Department of Homeland Security from identifying illegal aliens who are subject to removal by restricting the information local governments can share with federal agents. The DOJ contended that such local laws contradict federal laws that "prohibit state and local governments from refusing to share information."

A DOJ official told the New York Post that the administration's immigration enforcement effort includes "an all-hands-on-deck approach," noting that the lawsuit is "one tool in our tool belt."

"This lawsuit will put the spotlight on obstruction by state and local officials and their refusal to support the administration and compliance with the law. The law says people who are here illegally are not allowed to stay here; they should be deported. So we want to make sure those impediments are taken away," the official told the news outlet.

"These states and localities advertise themselves as sanctuary jurisdictions. They are inviting people here who are illegal, and they're promising to protect them from federal law enforcement," the official continued. "That's inconsistent with federal law, and it's impeding federal law enforcement efforts, and these laws need to be struck from the books because they're incentivizing illegal immigration into the country."

The DOJ anticipates that the lawsuit may go all the way to the Supreme Court, the official added.

During Attorney General Pam Bondi's first day on the job, she directed the DOJ to halt federal funding to sanctuary cities.

The DOJ official told the Post that it was "no coincidence" that the lawsuit was filed shortly after Bondi's swearing-in.

"She is right out of the gate sending a clear message to other sanctuary jurisdictions," the official stated.

Pritzker's office responded to the lawsuit, stating, “Unlike Donald Trump, Illinois follows the law. The bipartisan Illinois TRUST Act, signed into law by a Republican governor, has always been compliant with federal law and still is today. Illinois will defend our laws that prioritize police resources for fighting crime while enabling state law enforcement to assist with arresting violent criminals. Instead of working with us to support law enforcement, the Trump administration is making it more difficult to protect the public, just like they did when Trump pardoned the convicted January 6 violent criminals. We look forward to seeing them in court.”

Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle stated that the county plans to “fight back.”

“We will pursue every legal opportunity to defend the programs that we believe in and defend our values,” Preckwinkle said.

Johnson’s office did not respond to requests for comment from The Hill or Newsweek.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

AG Pam Bondi directs DOJ to pause federal funding to sanctuary cities



On Wednesday, newly confirmed Attorney General Pam Bondi directed the Department of Justice to halt federal funding to sanctuary cities.

Bondi was sworn in on Wednesday morning, and on her first day leading the DOJ, she issued several key directives.

'Will be subject to discipline and potentially termination.'

A memo obtained by Fox News Digital outlined Bondi's actions, including steps to end the nation's illegal immigration crisis.

She called on the DOJ to pause all federal funding to sanctuary cities and review funding agreements with nongovernmental organizations that provide services to illegal aliens.

Bondi instructed the agency to investigate sanctuary jurisdictions that have hindered Immigration and Customs Enforcement's efforts to detain and deport illegal immigrants. The DOJ's litigating components were directed to seek prosecution when necessary.

The Justice Department was told to work with the Department of Homeland Security and other federal agencies to "completely eliminate" cartel threats, Fox News Digital reported.

Bondi's strategy for addressing transnational criminal organizations includes shifting law enforcement resources toward foundationally dismantling the groups instead of focusing its efforts on detaining low-level offenders.

She pledged to "further empower[] and elevate[]" Joint Task Force Vulcan and Joint Task Force Alpha, coordinated DOJ efforts to eliminate MS-13 and combat human trafficking. According to the memo, Vulcan will be expanded to target members of the violent Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua.

Bondi is also moving quickly to address the fentanyl crisis, calling on the DOJ’s Office of Legal Policy to explore legislative reforms that would target the equipment used to create illicit pills.

The AG's memo stated that a DOJ attorney who "declines to sign a brief, refuses to advance good-faith arguments on behalf of the Trump administration, or otherwise delays or impedes the Justice Department's mission will be subject to discipline and potentially termination."

It read that the responsibilities of the DOJ attorneys include "aggressively enforcing criminal laws passed by Congress, but also vigorously defending presidential policies and actions on behalf of the United States against legal challenges."

"The discretion afforded Justice Department attorneys with respect to those responsibilities does not include latitude to substitute their personal political views or judgments for those that prevailed in the election," the memo added. "When Justice Department attorneys refuse to faithfully carry out their role by, for example, refusing to advance good-faith arguments or declining to sign briefs, it undermines the constitutional order and deprives the president of the benefit of his lawyers."

Bondi ended the federal ban on the death penalty. She asked that DOJ prosecutors seek the death penalty when appropriate and specifically for those convicted of violent drug trafficking offenses.

The agency was asked to "re-evaluate instances of the prior administration electing not to seek the death penalty."

Fox News Digital reported that Bondi's day-one directives also addressed combatting the weaponization of the legal system by establishing a "Weaponization Working Group," which would be tasked with identifying instances of "politicized justice."

The group will first evaluate the investigations into President Donald Trump conducted by former special counsel Jack Smith, along with similar probes led by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!