Trump allies warn california leaders they could face prison over sanctuary laws
California’s sanctuary laws have come under fresh attack, with allies of President-elect Donald Trump issuing warnings to state leaders about potential criminal liability. The America First Legal Foundation, led by Trump adviser Stephen Miller, sent letters to officials across the state, accusing them of violating federal immigration laws and suggesting that elected leaders in “sanctuary jurisdictions” could face prosecution.
In a letter dated 23 december, the organisation targeted san diego vounty, calling it a “sanctuary jurisdiction” and alleging that local policies obstruct federal immigration enforcement. The letter was part of a broader campaign in which 249 officials nationwide were identified as potentially facing “legal consequences.” California Attorney General Rob Bonta and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass were also recipients.
Tensions escalate over san diego’s new policy
The controversy centres on a policy adopted on 12 december by San Diego County’s Board of Supervisors. The new ordinance goes beyond California’s existing sanctuary law, SB 54, by prohibiting local law enforcement from communicating with federal immigration authorities about undocumented individuals in local jails without a judicial warrant.
This move sparked immediate backlash. San Diego county Sheriff Kelly Martinez announced she would not comply with the new policy, stating she would continue to allow federal immigration officials access to jail inmates.
Nora Vargas, chair of the board of supervisors and a long-time advocate for immigrant rights, defended the ordinance, asserting that it complies with all federal, state, and local laws. However, Vargas, the first immigrant and Latina to serve on the board, resigned from her position just days after the policy’s adoption, citing security concerns.
America first legal’s threats
The america first legal foundation claimed that federal laws make it a crime to obstruct immigration enforcement, accusing sanctuary jurisdictions of shielding undocumented individuals. The group suggested that local officials could also be held civilly liable under federal anti-racketeering statutes.
“Federal law is clear: aliens unlawfully present in the United States are subject to removal, and it is a crime to conceal, harbour, or shield them,” the letter stated.
Trump has pledged to execute the “largest mass deportation campaign in U.S. history” and appointed Miller to lead immigration policy efforts. Miller and his allies are reportedly considering withholding federal funds from sanctuary jurisdictions, a tactic attempted during Trump’s previous administration.
California pushes back
California leaders have vowed to resist federal pressure. Attorney General Rob Bonta dismissed the legal threats as a “scare tactic” and reaffirmed the state’s commitment to SB 54, which restricts local cooperation with federal immigration authorities. Bonta noted that the law was upheld by the courts during Trump’s first term.
Democratic state Senate leader Mike McGuire called the incoming administration’s proposed immigration policies “draconian” and pledged that California would be prepared for legal battles.
“The previous Trump administration came at California before on a variety of legal fronts and, the majority of the time, lost,” McGuire said.
Challenges for trump’s deportation plans
Trump’s ambitious deportation plan faces significant logistical and legal hurdles. Local cooperation is critical for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), with 70–75% of ICE arrests stemming from local law enforcement handoffs. However, California’s sanctuary policies complicate these efforts.
Since 2019, California’s state prison system has transferred over 5,700 formerly incarcerated individuals to ICE. Still, local jails are restricted from notifying federal authorities about the release of undocumented inmates unless they have committed specific serious crimes.
Ahilan Arulanantham, co-director of the Center for Immigration Law and Policy at UCLA, criticised the America First Legal letter, arguing that it misrepresents the legal concept of “harbouring.” “Not inquiring about someone’s status is not harbouring,” he explained.
More Read
Broader implications for sanctuary policies
Sanctuary policies have long been contentious. Advocates argue they encourage undocumented residents to report crimes without fear of deportation, enhancing public safety. Critics, including Trump allies, claim such policies undermine federal law and pose risks to national security.
Los Angeles fast-tracked its own sanctuary city ordinance in November, shortly after Trump’s election. Mayor Karen Bass dismissed the legal threats, calling them “wrong on public safety and wrong on the law.”
Looking ahead
California officials are bracing for renewed clashes with the Trump administration. Governor Gavin Newsom has requested $25 million for legal defences against federal challenges. Meanwhile, Trump’s team is reportedly exploring ways to punish sanctuary jurisdictions, including reviving lawsuits and withholding funding.
With tensions mounting, the battle over sanctuary laws will likely intensify, testing the balance of state and federal authority on immigration. For now, California remains steadfast in its commitment to protecting immigrant communities while preparing for the legal battles ahead.
