A little-known provision in President Trump’s new criminal justice funding bill could dramatically shift immigration policy nationwide. It ties federal money for local law enforcement to cooperation with federal immigration authorities—leaving liberal cities with a tough decision.
Key Facts:
- The bill allocates $3.3 billion to the DOJ, including funds for the Byrne-JAG Grant Program.
- To access these funds, cities must not obstruct communication between local police and the Department of Homeland Security about immigration status.
- Progressive leaders like Gavin Newsom and Zohran Mamdani oppose cooperating with federal immigration enforcement.
- Cities with high crime rates, including Baltimore and Detroit, risk losing funds if they refuse to comply.
- Congressional authorization now backs this requirement, making legal challenges less likely.
The Rest of The Story:
The “Big Beautiful Bill,” championed by President Trump, revives and expands a tactic used during his first term: conditioning federal criminal justice funding on compliance with immigration law.
Specifically, jurisdictions must permit their law enforcement agencies to share immigration status information with DHS to receive grant funds.
Democratic leaders are speaking out. Senator Dick Durbin claimed the stipulation “totally misses the mark,” arguing it politicizes public safety money.
In contrast, White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson countered, “Sanctuary cities only provide sanctuary to illegal criminals,” pointing to a recent CBP officer shot by two illegal aliens.
Some local officials argue this policy undermines public trust and local autonomy.
But now that Congress has included the condition in law, federal agencies are no longer relying on executive interpretation—strengthening the administration’s legal footing.
Commentary:
This move is shrewd policy-making with historical precedent.
President Reagan used a similar strategy in the 1980s to raise the national drinking age—threatening to withhold highway funding unless states complied. It worked. Every state fell in line, and the law stuck.
The Trump administration is now applying that same formula to immigration. If a state wants DOJ money for crime prevention, it must help enforce immigration law.
It’s not coercion; it’s prioritization. Congress controls the purse strings, and it just made its conditions clear.
There’s little legal gray area now. In 2017, the courts ruled the executive couldn’t unilaterally attach strings to Byrne-JAG grants.
But this time, Congress did it. Lawsuits will likely fail. Democrats now face a political dilemma.
Cities like New York and San Francisco pride themselves on resisting Trump’s immigration agenda. But turning down millions in funding while facing surging crime could backfire.
Constituents care about results—safe streets and strong police departments. These funds can hire officers, buy technology, and ease local budgets.
If progressive cities reject them to uphold political slogans, suburban and rural areas will gladly take the money.
Blue state leaders must now weigh ideology against practicality. Will they continue opposing ICE even at the cost of public safety dollars? Or will they quietly adjust policies to keep the funding flowing?
Either way, the message is clear: cooperation with federal immigration law is no longer optional if cities want federal aid.
The Bottom Line:
A new law ties federal criminal justice funding to local cooperation with immigration enforcement.
Liberal cities must now choose between their sanctuary policies and much-needed public safety dollars.
The legal framework is solid—Congress made the call, not the executive branch.
The political consequences for resisting may soon become clear.
Read Next
– Gavin Newsom, California Democrats Plot Illegal Gerrymander To Increase Number of Dem House Seats
– Soros-Funded Groups Throw Support Behind GOP Bill Offering Legal Status to Millions
