Sanctuary cities see legal holes in Trump's immigration orders(Reuters) - President Donald Trump’s executive order directing federal agencies to take away funding from self-proclaimed sanctuary cities had one big exemption for one of his favorite constituencies: the police, who would be protected from cuts. But Trump’s opponents say that very exemption makes it much more likely that a judge could strike down that section of the order as unconstitutional. It is just one example of the legal arguments that cities, immigration groups and other opponents are readying as they prepare to fight an executive order signed by Trump on Wednesday that would cut federal aid to “sanctuary” jurisdictions that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities. Lawyers for the potential challengers pointed to court rulings that said the federal government can only withhold funds to local jurisdictions if the money is directly tied to the behavior it objects to. The Trump administration cannot cut funds for sanctuary cities’ healthcare and education while preserving money for police, since those jobs relate more closely to immigration enforcement, said Richard Doyle, city attorney in San Jose, California. He said it was not clear whether existing federal funding or only future grants would be targeted.    Supporters of the new Republican president’s actions say that sanctuary cities ignore federal law and think the White House will be able to answer with a strong case in court. Federal law allows Trump to restrict public assistance “of any kind where an illegal alien could possibly benefit,” said Dale Wilcox, executive director of the Washington-based conservative Immigration Reform Law Institute.  The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. In New York City, Mayor Bill de Blasio in a news conference said his chief legal officer would be in court the “hour” after any specific action to withhold money came through. “There is less here than meets the eye. This executive order is written in a very vague fashion,” said de Blasio, a Democrat. San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera, also a Democrat, said his office was still examining whether it could sue before Trump made any specific move to cut funds.  Trump’s order directed that funding be slashed to all jurisdictions that refuse to comply with a statute that requires local governments to share information with immigration authorities.  Omar Jadwat, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, said the cities can argue “they are fully in compliance with that statute,” since they do share information with federal authorities, but offer limited cooperation when it comes to turning over immigrants who are not convicted criminals. There could also be procedural snarls to implementing the cuts, lawyers who specialize in federal grants said. If the U.S. government seeks to cut off grants to a certain recipient, it must go through a complicated process known as “suspension and debarment,” and cities would have the right to appeal. “It’s fair to say that they don’t understand the scope and reach of federal grants law,” said Edward Waters, who heads the federal grants practice at the law firm Feldesman Tucker Leifer Fidell in Washington, referring to the Trump administration. The White House would also have to negotiate with states that are home to sanctuary cities. Nearly 90 percent of $652 billion the federal government handed out through more 1,500 separate grant programs in the most recent fiscal year went to states, not directly to cities, according to a Reuters review of federal spending data. If the Trump administration wanted to try to cut off Medicaid money to Chicago, for example, it would have to work through the state government of Illinois, which could pose an additional barrier, Waters said. Advocacy groups for immigrants’ rights said they are also preparing their own legal challenges to other aspects of two executive orders Trump signed on Wednesday, examining sections that deal with expanding detention of immigrants and changing how asylum requests are processed.  “All of our legal research is done, most of the complaints are all drafted,” said Marielena Hincapie, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center, based in Los Angeles. She said litigation could be filed in the next days. politicsNews
sanctuary cities see legal holes trump immigration orders reuters president donald trump executive order directing federal agencies take away funding sanctuary cities one big exemption one favorite constituencies police would protected cuts but trump opponents say exemption makes much likely judge could strike section order unconstitutional it one example legal arguments cities immigration groups opponents reading prepare fight executive order signed trump wednesday would cut federal aid sanctuary jurisdictions limit cooperation federal immigration authorities lawyers potential challengers pointed court rulings said federal government withhold funds local jurisdictions money directly tied behavior objects the trump administration cut funds sanctuary cities healthcare education preserving money police since jobs relate closely immigration enforcement said richard doyle city attorney san jose california he said clear whether existing federal funding future grants would targeted supporters new republican president actions say sanctuary cities ignore federal law think white house able answer strong case court federal law allows trump restrict public assistance kind illegal alien could possibly benefit said dale wilson executive director conservative immigration reform law institute the white house immediately respond request comment in new york city mayor bill de basis news conference said chief legal officer would court hour specific action withhold money came there less meets eye this executive order written vague fashion said de basis democrat san francisco city attorney dennis herbert also democrat said office still examining whether could sue trump made specific move cut funds trump order directed funding slashed jurisdictions refuse comply statute requires local governments share information immigration authorities omar jawa director american civil liberties union immigrants rights project said cities argue fully compliance statute since share information federal authorities offer limited cooperation comes turning immigrants convicted criminals there could also procedural snails implementing cuts lawyers specialize federal grants said if government seeks cut grants certain recipient must go complicated process known suspension department cities would right appeal it fair say understand scope reach federal grants law said edward waters heads federal grants practice law firm feldesman tucker life field washington referring trump administration the white house would also negotiate states home sanctuary cities nearly percent billion federal government handed separate grant programs recent fiscal year went states directly cities according reuters review federal spending data if trump administration wanted try cut medical money chicago example would work state government illinois could pose additional barrier waters said advocacy groups immigrants rights said also preparing legal challenges aspects two executive orders trump signed wednesday examining sections deal expanding detention immigrants changing asylum requests processed all legal research done complaints drafted said marielena hincapie executive director national immigration law center based los angeles she said litigation could filed next days politicsnews
Your task is to classify the provided input as real or fake news. Label 0 is meant for fake news, Label 1 is for real news. TEXT: Sanctuary cities see legal holes in Trump's immigration orders(Reuters) - President Donald Trump’s executive order directing federal agencies to take away funding from self-proclaimed sanctuary cities had one big exemption for one of his favorite constituencies: the police, who would be protected from cuts. But Trump’s opponents say that very exemption makes it much more likely that a judge could strike down that section of the order as unconstitutional. It is just one example of the legal arguments that cities, immigration groups and other opponents are readying as they prepare to fight an executive order signed by Trump on Wednesday that would cut federal aid to “sanctuary” jurisdictions that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities. Lawyers for the potential challengers pointed to court rulings that said the federal government can only withhold funds to local jurisdictions if the money is directly tied to the behavior it objects to. The Trump administration cannot cut funds for sanctuary cities’ healthcare and education while preserving money for police, since those jobs relate more closely to immigration enforcement, said Richard Doyle, city attorney in San Jose, California. He said it was not clear whether existing federal funding or only future grants would be targeted.    Supporters of the new Republican president’s actions say that sanctuary cities ignore federal law and think the White House will be able to answer with a strong case in court. Federal law allows Trump to restrict public assistance “of any kind where an illegal alien could possibly benefit,” said Dale Wilcox, executive director of the Washington-based conservative Immigration Reform Law Institute.  The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. In New York City, Mayor Bill de Blasio in a news conference said his chief legal officer would be in court the “hour” after any specific action to withhold money came through. “There is less here than meets the eye. This executive order is written in a very vague fashion,” said de Blasio, a Democrat. San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera, also a Democrat, said his office was still examining whether it could sue before Trump made any specific move to cut funds.  Trump’s order directed that funding be slashed to all jurisdictions that refuse to comply with a statute that requires local governments to share information with immigration authorities.  Omar Jadwat, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, said the cities can argue “they are fully in compliance with that statute,” since they do share information with federal authorities, but offer limited cooperation when it comes to turning over immigrants who are not convicted criminals. There could also be procedural snarls to implementing the cuts, lawyers who specialize in federal grants said. If the U.S. government seeks to cut off grants to a certain recipient, it must go through a complicated process known as “suspension and debarment,” and cities would have the right to appeal. “It’s fair to say that they don’t understand the scope and reach of federal grants law,” said Edward Waters, who heads the federal grants practice at the law firm Feldesman Tucker Leifer Fidell in Washington, referring to the Trump administration. The White House would also have to negotiate with states that are home to sanctuary cities. Nearly 90 percent of $652 billion the federal government handed out through more 1,500 separate grant programs in the most recent fiscal year went to states, not directly to cities, according to a Reuters review of federal spending data. If the Trump administration wanted to try to cut off Medicaid money to Chicago, for example, it would have to work through the state government of Illinois, which could pose an additional barrier, Waters said. Advocacy groups for immigrants’ rights said they are also preparing their own legal challenges to other aspects of two executive orders Trump signed on Wednesday, examining sections that deal with expanding detention of immigrants and changing how asylum requests are processed.  “All of our legal research is done, most of the complaints are all drafted,” said Marielena Hincapie, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center, based in Los Angeles. She said litigation could be filed in the next days. politicsNews
Your task is to classify the provided input as real or fake news. Label 0 is meant for fake news, Label 1 is for real news. TEXT: sanctuary cities see legal holes trump immigration orders reuters president donald trump executive order directing federal agencies take away funding sanctuary cities one big exemption one favorite constituencies police would protected cuts but trump opponents say exemption makes much likely judge could strike section order unconstitutional it one example legal arguments cities immigration groups opponents reading prepare fight executive order signed trump wednesday would cut federal aid sanctuary jurisdictions limit cooperation federal immigration authorities lawyers potential challengers pointed court rulings said federal government withhold funds local jurisdictions money directly tied behavior objects the trump administration cut funds sanctuary cities healthcare education preserving money police since jobs relate closely immigration enforcement said richard doyle city attorney san jose california he said clear whether existing federal funding future grants would targeted supporters new republican president actions say sanctuary cities ignore federal law think white house able answer strong case court federal law allows trump restrict public assistance kind illegal alien could possibly benefit said dale wilson executive director conservative immigration reform law institute the white house immediately respond request comment in new york city mayor bill de basis news conference said chief legal officer would court hour specific action withhold money came there less meets eye this executive order written vague fashion said de basis democrat san francisco city attorney dennis herbert also democrat said office still examining whether could sue trump made specific move cut funds trump order directed funding slashed jurisdictions refuse comply statute requires local governments share information immigration authorities omar jawa director american civil liberties union immigrants rights project said cities argue fully compliance statute since share information federal authorities offer limited cooperation comes turning immigrants convicted criminals there could also procedural snails implementing cuts lawyers specialize federal grants said if government seeks cut grants certain recipient must go complicated process known suspension department cities would right appeal it fair say understand scope reach federal grants law said edward waters heads federal grants practice law firm feldesman tucker life field washington referring trump administration the white house would also negotiate states home sanctuary cities nearly percent billion federal government handed separate grant programs recent fiscal year went states directly cities according reuters review federal spending data if trump administration wanted try cut medical money chicago example would work state government illinois could pose additional barrier waters said advocacy groups immigrants rights said also preparing legal challenges aspects two executive orders trump signed wednesday examining sections deal expanding detention immigrants changing asylum requests processed all legal research done complaints drafted said marielena hincapie executive director national immigration law center based los angeles she said litigation could filed next days politicsnews