Date AnnouncedJuly 25, 2017
DOJ expands its anti-sanctuary policies by restricting eligibility for the FY 2017 Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program to jurisdictions that comply with 8 U.S.C. § 1373 (which mandates Federal, state, and local governments provide individuals' citizenship or immigration status to DHS).
DOJ's new solicitation for Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Programs imposes three new grant "conditions" on applicants, requiring that applicants 1) certify that they are in compliance with 8 U.S.C. § 1373; 2) allow federal immigration access to detention facilities and 2) provide DHS 48 hours advance notice before they release a noncitizen wanted for removal by federal authorities.
[ID #267]View Policy Document View Policy Document
Effective Date of ChangeJuly 25, 2017
Subsequent ActionJuly 13, 2020
The First, Third, Seventh and Ninth Circuits have found the DOJ's immigration-related conditions on the 2017 Byrne/JAG grants to be unlawful. Most recently, in March and July 2020, the First and Ninth Circuits concluded that DOJ lacked statutory authority to impose the new conditions. The courts did not reach the additional arguments advanced by the plaintiff cities that the conditions are arbitrary and capricious and that they violate the Spending Clause. See City of Providence v. Barr (1st Cir. Case No. 19-1802—Mar. 24, 2020); City of Philadelphia v. AG (3rd Cir. Case No. 18-2648—Feb. 19, 2019); Chicago v. Barr (7th Cir. Case No. 19-3290—Apr. 30, 2020); Los Angeles v. Barr (9th Cir. Case No. 18-56292—Oct. 31, 2019); City & County of San Francisco v. Barr (9th Cir. Case No. 18-17311--July 13, 2020). The Second Circuit has found the conditions lawful. See New York v. DOJ (2nd Cir. Case No. 19-267—Feb. 26, 2020). A petition for rehearing en banc was denied on July 13, 2020. The Supreme Court has extended the deadline for the filing of a petition for writ of certiorari until December 10, 2020. Litigation challenging the modified 2018 grant conditions continues in various district courts.Ninth Circuit Opinion
**Litigation is listed for informational purposes and is not comprehensive. For the current status of legal challenges, check other sources.**
Type of Action: Agency Directive
Subject Matter: Sanctuary Restrictions