The County of Santa Clara filed a lawsuit Friday in federal court challenging President Donald Trump's executive order that seeks to withhold federal funding from cities and counties that do not assist his administration in the deportation of immigrants, county officials said Friday.
The lawsuit was filed by the Office of the County Counsel and the law firm Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, which is representing the county on a pro bono basis.
The lawsuit argues that coercing cities and counties to cooperate with federal deportation efforts by threatening to withhold unrelated federal funding, violates the Constitution. County officials said that withholding federal funds would jeopardize critical county services such as health care, mental health services, public safety and early childhood education programs.
"Santa Clara County, the home of Silicon Valley, is a welcoming community that embraces immigrants and we will resist any effort to divide us," said Dave Cortese, president of the Board of Supervisors.
"Immigrants contribute to the very fabric of our nation and we will not stand by while the Trump Administration seeks to impose un-American and illegal policies that undermine our values," Cortese said.
The lawsuit seeks to prohibit the Trump administration from withholding federal funds from states, cities and counties that are targeted by the order.
Related content:
• Stanford joins universities in challenging Trump's travel ban
• Appeals court to hear Trump administration's bid to reinstate travel ban
• Stanford student sues over immigration ban
• Palo Alto man helps Afghan interpreter receive visa
• Stanford: Trump immigration ban 'deeply antithetical' to university values
• Santa Clara County to file lawsuit against President Trump's order
Comments
Registered user
Barron Park
on Feb 6, 2017 at 8:56 pm
Registered user
on Feb 6, 2017 at 8:56 pm
I am glad Mr. Cortese feels entitled to define what is "American". I guess he can ignore the tens of millions that elected Trump to stop the pillaging of our country by the globalists like him.
Maybe when the Federal government stops sending Billions of dollars to California to prop up this Ponzi scheme for the privileged, he and his staff will get a chance to work pro bono too.
Downtown North
on Feb 6, 2017 at 9:37 pm
on Feb 6, 2017 at 9:37 pm
"...that elected Trump to stop the pillaging of our country by the globalists..."
Even if we were to believe this alternate fact, why do you prefer the pillaging of our country by Wall Street under Trump?
Registered user
Barron Park
on Feb 6, 2017 at 10:55 pm
Registered user
on Feb 6, 2017 at 10:55 pm
The number and breadth of donors plus the shockingly large amount of money lavished on Hillary Clinton by the financial sector ($100M+) was the tip off. Ever since Obama, the Democrat party is the Wall Street party and HRC was bought and paid for by the progressive global elites.
Charleston Meadows
on Feb 6, 2017 at 11:40 pm
on Feb 6, 2017 at 11:40 pm
The problem on the table here - with San Jose as an example - is that the news has identified a number of gangs by name and general location. Add to that the news has had numerous articles about the police force working so much overtime that they have to stay in motor homes to get some sleep. The news has also reported on the rise in crime in San Jose exceeding the previous years. If we look at San Francisco we have a major drug problem. We are talking heroin and cocaine plus some newer drugs. Bernie talked about the drug crises in the east coast. We know it is in Chicago. If the cities are not turning in the illegals who have recorded prison records and letting them loose then the city is complicit in supporting the cartels and gangs at the expense of the taxpayer health and safety. At this time the focus is on the cartel supported crime issues.
So how much of the cartel money is pushing the elected officials? And they do not have the right to define California values when they are not protecting the taxpayers. If they cannot get on board to clean up the mess then the taxpayer will clean it up by getting rid of the elected officials that are not taking action on crime related illegal immigration. Has anyone here heard of LEGAL IMMIGRATION? Yes it exists and is not a focus or intention on this issue.
Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on Feb 7, 2017 at 7:28 am
on Feb 7, 2017 at 7:28 am
I'm all for sanctuary cities if it means if living in one I can get a tax-relief sanctuary so I don't have to pay taxes to support sanctuary cities. Fair enough?