In an appearance at the Detroit Economic Club on Tuesday, President Trump said federal dollars will be pulled from “sanctuary” jurisdictions including California and Los Angeles.
(Ryan Sun/Associated Press)
By
Gavin J. QuintonStaff Writer
Jan. 14, 2026
2:59 PM PT
4 min
Click here to listen to this article
Share via
Close extra sharing options
Email Facebook X LinkedIn Threads Reddit WhatsAppCopy Link URL
Copied!
0:00
0:00
1x
This is read by an automated voice. Please report any issues or inconsistencies here.
California officials pointed out that courts have repeatedly sided against the president on this matter.
Sanctuary policies generally do not block federal authorities from carrying out immigration actions, but restrict how local resources can be used.
WASHINGTON — State and local officials are once again on the defensive after President Trump renewed threats Wednesday to strike federal dollars from “sanctuary” jurisdictions such as California and Los Angeles, which have long opposed cooperation with immigration enforcement agencies.
The ultimatum, laid out in an early morning Truth Social post, echoed sweeping statements the president made Tuesday at the Detroit Economic Club, putting billions in funding flagged for healthcare, education and transportation at stake.
“Effective Feb. 1, no more payments will be made by the federal government to states for their corrupt criminal protection centers known as sanctuary cities. All they do is breed crime and violence. If states want them, they will have to pay for them,” he said.
Advertisement
The U.S. government is supplying $175 billion to California this fiscal year — about a third of the state’s total 2025-26 spending plan, according to state budget records.
Federal court upholds California’s new congressional districts in a victory for DemocratsFederal court rules on challenge to new California congressional districts
Last year, the U.S. Department of Justice created a list of dozens of state and local governments identified as “sanctuary” jurisdictions based on policies that limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.
Those policies generally do not block federal authorities from carrying out immigration actions, but restrict how local resources can be used.
Advertisement
California Department of Justice officials were quick to point out that courts have repeatedly sided against the president on this matter, most recently in August, when a judge ruled the federal government cannot deny funding to Los Angeles and 30 other cities over policies that limit cooperation on immigration enforcement.
The ruling, by U.S. District Judge William Orrick, extended an earlier injunction that established Trump’s efforts to cut federal funding were probably unconstitutional and violated the separation of powers doctrine.
But at a December hearing, a 9th Circuit Court of Appeals panel signaled it might overturn the injunction, as judges questioned whether the administration’s latest orders actually require agencies to cut funding in a way that exceeds their authority.
A final ruling on the appeal is pending.
California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta’s office said in a statement Wednesday that the substance of White House threats wasn’t clear.
“While details here are in short supply, we’ll have to take a look at whatever the president actually does,” Bonta said. “We remain prepared to take action as necessary to protect our state and uphold the law.”
Bonta has also defeated the administration over its attempts to impose illegal immigration enforcement conditions on transportation, homeland security and Victims of Crime Act funding.
Advertisement
On Tuesday, he announced a multistate challenge to Trump’s plans to freeze $10 billion in federal child care and social services funding amid unsubstantiated allegations that the state was “illicitly providing illegal aliens” with benefits.
Gov. Gavin Newsom took a moment to lean on the state’s winning legal record.
“Please pray for the president as he struggles with cognitive decline. He already forgot he tried this before — multiple times — and we sued him and won,” Newsom said in a statement Wednesday.
Though the White House wouldn’t comment on a specific legal framework or dollar amount for this wave of funding cuts, Spokesperson Abigail Jackson said Wednesday that sanctuary cities are “incredibly dangerous” and put law-abiding Americans at risk.
Former Huntington Beach city attorney, a Newsom critic, to run for state attorney generalMichael Gates, the former Huntington Beach city attorney who spent his tenure as a staunch antagonist to California’s liberal politics, is running for state attorney general as part of a slate with Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton.
She added that the Trump administration is considering “a variety of lawful options” to implement this policy.
The issue of executive overreach is at the fore for Senate Democrats, too, who are challenging the president over military action in Venezuela.
“Let me be clear: Congress—not the White House and not Donald Trump — holds the power of the purse,” said Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.).
Advertisement
Los Angeles City Atty. Hydee Feldstein Soto confirmed the city would take legal action to protect its access to federal dollars.
Mayor Karen Bass said she plans to work with partners at every level of government to ensure Angelenos continue to receive government services.
“Hardworking, honest Americans should not have to pay the price for the president’s continued political attack on blue states and cities,” she said in a statement.
More to Read
Federal judge blocks Trump administration’s freeze of $10 billion in child-care fundsJan. 9, 2026
California sues Trump administration over ‘baseless and cruel’ freezing of child-care fundsJan. 8, 2026
Trump freezes California child-care funds, jolting a fragile industry and working familiesJan. 7, 2026