In a decisive move on her first day in office, Attorney General Pam Bondi has ordered a halt to federal funding for sanctuary jurisdictions that refuse to comply with federal immigration authorities.

Bondi's action is poised to impact several cities and states, such as New York, California, and Connecticut, which rely on federal funds while maintaining policies that limit cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), as the New York Post reports.

The AG aged 59, signed the order immediately after her inauguration ceremony, which took place at the Oval Office. The event was officiated by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and attended by President Trump. Her directive outlines a temporary pause, mandating a 60-day suspension of the distribution of funds.

Immediate Suspension and Pending Review

The directive states that a comprehensive review is expected, with a report due within 45 days. Sanctuary jurisdictions, as defined by the memo, will not have access to Department of Justice funds. This move forms part of a broader strategy to enforce compliance with federal immigration laws.

Furthermore, the decision includes provisions for terminating agreements linked to legal violations, or waste, fraud, or abuse. It also prohibits the DOJ from entering into new contracts with non-governmental organizations supporting unlawful immigration.

New York, both as a state and a city, is likely to experience financial strain as they face possible cutbacks. Although DOJ allocations form a minor share of New York's budget, the city grapples with budget pressures from housing and assisting migrants.

Wide-Ranging Impact Across Multiple Jurisdictions

California, Connecticut, Chicago, Philadelphia, and Washington, D.C., are among other sanctuary jurisdictions that might be affected by this development. The directive may significantly influence how these areas manage their expenses and cooperation with federal immigration policies.

New York City, with a projected receipt of over $8 billion from the federal government in fiscal year 2025, risks financial repercussions if defunding proceeds.

Such fiscal strategies may be employed by the administration to strengthen adherence to immigration enforcement, including potential mass deportations.

The Trump administration embarked on a deportation campaign shortly after his inauguration on Jan. 20. The focus has predominantly been on individuals charged or convicted of crimes. Some deportees have been dispatched to Guantanamo Bay, serving as a deterrent.

Potential Legislative Support and Historical Context

House Speaker Mike Johnson, from Louisiana, has expressed backing for this federal funding cessation. His sentiments reflect prevailing Republican perspectives that challenge the legitimacy of receiving aid while not complying with federal laws.

“The idea that you would maintain a sanctuary city status and then cry out to the federal government for assistance,” he stated in a 2023 interview has been deemed unacceptable by Johnson. This perspective resonates with the broader Republican base.

During Trump's previous term, attempts were made to withdraw funds from cities like New York, Seattle, and Portland for their stance on crime and policing. However, President Biden reversed those decisions in 2021.

Challenges Within Justice Department Persist

Bondi takes the helm of the Justice Department amidst internal tensions. These frictions involve Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove and the FBI, predominantly over handling Trump's directives concerning the alleged weaponization of the legal system under Biden.

As Bondi settles into her new role, navigating these internal dynamics will be crucial.

Her leadership may further shape the DOJ's trajectory on contentious issues such as federal funding and immigration.

The decision to halt funding to sanctuary jurisdictions is set to reverberate through the political and social landscapes.

As the 45-day review proceeds, it remains to be seen how jurisdictions will respond to these shifts in federal support.