Justice Department threatens to subpoena records in escalating battle with 'sanctuary' jurisdictions
Source: Washington Post
By Matt Zapotosky January 24 at 12:00 PM
The Justice Department on Wednesday escalated its attempt to crack down on so-called “sanctuary” jurisdictions, threatening to subpoena 23 states, cities and other localities which have policies the department suspects might be unlawfully interfering with immigration enforcement.
President Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions have long promised to target places with policies friendly to those in the country illegally — warning they might withhold federal money from some and trying to tie grant eligibility to cooperation with federal authorities on immigration matters. The Justice Department had previously contacted the 23 jurisdictions threatened Wednesday, raising worries they might be in violation of a federal law barring places from enacting policies that block communication with Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
In a new letter, Bureau of Justice Assistance Director Jon Adler said officials remained “concerned” that the places had policies that violate the law, even after their previous responses. He asked for a new bevy of documents — including “any orders, directives, instructions, or guidance to your law enforcement employees” — and said the department would subpoena the materials if necessary.
That threat escalates the department’s effort, as it could have the courts compelling jurisdictions to turn over documents that they didn’t provide voluntarily.
-snip-
Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/justice-department-threatens-to-subpoena-records-in-escalating-battle-with-sanctuary-jurisdictions/2018/01/24/984d0fee-0113-11e8-bb03-722769454f82_story.html
= new reply since forum marked as read
How many fucking times does someone (including the courts) have to tell them that Congress controls "the power of the purse" and designates how the funds are to be spent. 
The stuff that they were targeting had already been designated for specific uses and DOJ could not "withhold funds" that Congress had designated via appropriations legislation. Congress CAN rewrite the appropriations to exclude certain uses for that funding by explicitly designating what it should be used for, but they have to do it in such a way as to not have it appear to be a "bill of attainder" (or ex post facto law), which is what DOJ was essentially trying to do with their interpretation and implementation of the appropriations.
This is why they lost in court several times now. And although the "grants" process is a bit different, Chicago won against the DOJ in September, and in the case here in Philly, a 3rd District Court judge ruled against the DOJ, and finally, the NoCal District (for San Francisco) permanently blocked the E.O. a week after Philly's ruling this past November.
