Trump

County of Santa Clara v. Trump

Good Law
275 F. Supp. 3d 1196
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 20, 2017Case No. 17-cv-00574-WHO, Case No. 17-cv-00485-WHOCalifornia10,070 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Orrick, J.

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

INTRODUCTION

On April 25, 2017, I entered a preliminary injunction against Section 9(a) of Executive Order 13768, “Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States,”, 82 Fed. Reg. 8799 (Jan. 25, 2017) (the “Executive Order”). Preliminary Injunction Order (“PI Order”)(SF Dkt. No. 82), (SC Dkt. No. 98). I concluded that the County of Santa Clara and the City and County of San Francisco had pre-enforcement standing to protect hundreds of millions of dollars of federal grants from the unconstitutionally broad sweep of the Executive Order. The federal government argued for the first time at the hearing for the preliminary injunction that the Executive Order was meant to be far more narrow than I interpreted it, a mere.directive to the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) and the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) that does not seek to place any new conditions on federal funds. I concluded that this interpretation was not legally plausible in light of the Executive Order’s plain language, as confirmed by the administration’s many statements indicating the Executive Order’s expansive scope. PI Order at 14.

A month later, the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.