{"id":1627,"date":"2020-07-13T10:49:21","date_gmt":"2020-07-13T17:49:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=1627"},"modified":"2020-07-13T11:13:15","modified_gmt":"2020-07-13T18:13:15","slug":"usca9-issues-split-decision-in-sanctuary-city-grant-case","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=1627","title":{"rendered":"USCA9 Issues Split Decision in Sanctuary City Grant Case"},"content":{"rendered":"

Not surprisingly given its prior narrow interpretations, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today affirmed<\/a> the decision of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on the sanctuary city grant issue. That is, the federal government cannot deny federal law-enforcement grants for a state’s refusal to inform immigration authorities when they release a deportable alien from prison and related matters. However, the court vacated the nationwide aspect of the injunction, limiting it to California.<\/p>\n

We uphold the district court\u2019s entry of permanent injunctive relief barring DOJ from withholding or denying Plaintiffs\u2019 Byrne awards based on the Challenged Conditions. However, we vacate the district court\u2019s imposition of a nationwide injunction. The district court abused its discretion by issuing a nationwide injunction without determining whether Plaintiffs needed relief of this scope to fully recover. We do not remand to the district court for further consideration because Plaintiffs have established no nexus between their claimed injuries and the nationwide operation of the Challenged Conditions, and they advance no reason why limiting the injunction along state boundaries would not grant them full relief. Therefore, the geographical reach of the relief should be limited to California.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Not surprisingly given its prior narrow interpretations, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today affirmed the decision of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on the sanctuary city grant issue. That is, the federal government cannot deny federal law-enforcement grants for a state’s refusal to inform immigration authorities when they release a deportable alien from prison and related matters. However, the court vacated the nationwide aspect of the injunction, limiting it to California.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[19,26,43],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1627","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-federalism","category-immigration","category-prisons"],"yoast_head":"\nUSCA9 Issues Split Decision in Sanctuary City Grant Case - Crime & Consequences<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=1627\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"USCA9 Issues Split Decision in Sanctuary City Grant Case - Crime & Consequences\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Not surprisingly given its prior narrow interpretations, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today affirmed the decision of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on the sanctuary city grant issue. That is, the federal government cannot deny federal law-enforcement grants for a state’s refusal to inform immigration authorities when they release a deportable alien from prison and related matters. However, the court vacated the nationwide aspect of the injunction, limiting it to California.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=1627\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Crime & Consequences\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/CriminalJusticeLegalFoundation\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-07-13T17:49:21+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2020-07-13T18:13:15+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/07\/FB_DefaultLJ.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"300\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"400\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Kent Scheidegger\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Kent Scheidegger\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"1 minute\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=1627\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=1627\",\"name\":\"USCA9 Issues Split Decision in Sanctuary City Grant Case - Crime & Consequences\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2020-07-13T17:49:21+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-07-13T18:13:15+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/1ab62da9ed4ddd3a58d70c77eef37356\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=1627#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=1627\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=1627#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"USCA9 Issues Split Decision in Sanctuary City Grant Case\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/\",\"name\":\"Crime & Consequences\",\"description\":\"Crime and criminal law\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/1ab62da9ed4ddd3a58d70c77eef37356\",\"name\":\"Kent Scheidegger\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.cjlf.org\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?author=1\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"USCA9 Issues Split Decision in Sanctuary City Grant Case - Crime & Consequences","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=1627","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"USCA9 Issues Split Decision in Sanctuary City Grant Case - Crime & Consequences","og_description":"Not surprisingly given its prior narrow interpretations, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today affirmed the decision of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on the sanctuary city grant issue. That is, the federal government cannot deny federal law-enforcement grants for a state’s refusal to inform immigration authorities when they release a deportable alien from prison and related matters. However, the court vacated the nationwide aspect of the injunction, limiting it to California.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=1627","og_site_name":"Crime & Consequences","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/CriminalJusticeLegalFoundation\/","article_published_time":"2020-07-13T17:49:21+00:00","article_modified_time":"2020-07-13T18:13:15+00:00","og_image":[{"width":300,"height":400,"url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/07\/FB_DefaultLJ.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"Kent Scheidegger","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Kent Scheidegger","Est. reading time":"1 minute"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=1627","url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=1627","name":"USCA9 Issues Split Decision in Sanctuary City Grant Case - Crime & Consequences","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2020-07-13T17:49:21+00:00","dateModified":"2020-07-13T18:13:15+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/1ab62da9ed4ddd3a58d70c77eef37356"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=1627#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=1627"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=1627#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"USCA9 Issues Split Decision in Sanctuary City Grant Case"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/","name":"Crime & Consequences","description":"Crime and criminal law","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/1ab62da9ed4ddd3a58d70c77eef37356","name":"Kent Scheidegger","sameAs":["https:\/\/www.cjlf.org"],"url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?author=1"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1627","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1627"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1627\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1629,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1627\/revisions\/1629"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1627"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1627"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1627"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}