Trump Hits Back at ‘Sanctuary Cities’ Over DACA Tuition Perks

President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Monday aimed at cities his administration claims are not cooperating with immigration enforcement efforts. This move also targets non-citizen college students receiving in-state tuition.

During his first term, Trump attempted to use law enforcement grants as leverage against what he termed “sanctuary cities,” compelling them to collaborate with the federal government on immigration matters. However, federal judges hindered Trump’s initial executive order due to its unconstitutional implications, as highlighted by a California ruling.

Undeterred, Trump issued new orders in January, compelling U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi to state the Justice Department would cut funding to non-compliant cities. Trump’s latest actions include measures described as enforcing federal law to ensure safety from “dangerous” individuals in the country.

The order seeks to prevent unauthorized individuals from accessing federal benefits, such as in-state tuition or leniency in sentencing that supposedly favors non-citizens. To reinforce this agenda, the White House presented a series of alleged crimes committed by non-citizens, even displaying posters on the White House lawn detailing these cases.

In a statement, Trump criticized sanctuary cities for protecting criminals rather than victims, vowing to withhold federal funding from municipalities embracing these policies. He instructed Bondi and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to identify jurisdictions obstructing immigration law enforcement, offering these cities a chance to rectify their non-compliance.

The White House asserted that cities failing to comply with federal law might face significant funding cuts. Trump’s rhetoric characterized the actions of some local officials as a “lawless insurrection” against federal authority.

Rex Scott, chair of the Pima County Board of Supervisors, described the executive order as “pathetic and predictable,” suggesting that it resorts to immigrant scapegoating when other approaches fail. Voters in Tucson previously rejected a proposal to establish a sanctuary city by nearly a 3-1 margin.

This latest executive order follows a ruling by U.S. District Judge William H. Orrick, who blocked Trump’s last funding-withholding attempt from January, arguing it violated multiple constitutional clauses. The judge indicated that such punitive measures threaten local governments with irreparable harm due to budget uncertainties and erosion of trust within communities.

“Trump’s economic policies are wreaking havoc,” Scott stated, highlighting the detrimental effects on essential services like education and healthcare. Tucson City Councilmember Lane Santa Cruz criticized Trump’s orders, asserting a commitment to not collaborating with federal immigration enforcement.

Naureen Shah, director of government affairs for the ACLU’s Equality Division, labeled the administration’s actions a manipulation of local resources for mass deportation. She emphasized the autonomy of states and cities in deciding how to allocate resources, arguing that local priorities often conflict with federal immigration goals.

The definition of a “sanctuary city” remains ambiguous. It generally refers to local jurisdictions that limit their cooperation with federal immigration enforcement but do not necessarily impede it entirely.

ICE’s detainer requests, seeking local law enforcement’s assistance in holding unauthorized individuals, often face resistance due to rising costs and potential legal ramifications. In Arizona, only a few agencies operate under ICE’s 287g program, underscoring local reluctance to engage in federal immigration actions.

Trump’s new orders also include provisions targeting non-citizens receiving in-state tuition, an initiative that could impact student loans for many in Arizona. This directly contradicts Arizona’s Prop. 308, passed in 2022, which permits eligible non-citizen high school graduates to access in-state tuition and scholarships.

While merely a fraction of states currently provide in-state tuition for non-citizens, Trump’s recent actions reflect a broader shift towards limiting access to educational opportunities for these students. If enacted, these policies could have far-reaching implications across numerous states.