Trump team eyes funding showdown with ‘sanctuary cities’ over immigration

President-elect Donald Trump’s advisers are discussing how to unilaterally strip federal resources from Chicago and other Democratic-run cities if they refuse to participate in deportations of undocumented immigrants next year, according to three people familiar with the conversations.

Advisers to Trump have pushed for using federal pressure - such as withholding federal funds - against municipalities that don’t cooperate with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on deportations, the people said. The people spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe efforts not yet made public.

Trump vowed mass deportations during his campaign - eliciting fierce pushback from some Democratic mayors in “sanctuary cities” and governors in blue states, some of whom are already promising to defy the president-elect’s pledges. He tried to slash funds to those jurisdictions in his first term, but with only limited success, and any similar effort in his second term could also run into roadblocks.

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson (D) told The Washington Post that “there will not be any cooperation” with ICE deportations and that the city will challenge any threats to its funding.

Trump allies have also discussed the idea publicly, including billionaire entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, the co-leader with fellow entrepreneur Elon Musk of Trump’s nongovernmental “Department of Government Efficiency” panel to suggest cuts to the federal budget.

“Not an iota, not a cent of government spending should go to subsidize this,” Ramaswamy said on Nov. 10 on ABC’s “This Week,” referring to cities that don’t enforce immigration law. “Not to sanctuary cities, not to federal aid to people who are in this country illegally, and we’re going to see a large number, by the millions, of self-deportations as well.”

These dueling positions could set off a major clash between the new administration and elected leaders around the country - with no clear legal mechanism for resolution. Cities such as Chicago, Denver and San Francisco depend on federal funds for everything from transportation to housing - but they are also led by Trump critics who have promised to protect immigrants in their communities.

The definition of “sanctuary” jurisdictions varies widely, but is generally understood to mean cities or states that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement officials - denying them access to jails, police and sheriffs, housing and workplace information, and other resources.

Supporters of sanctuary policies say deportations splinter families and undermine local policing by making immigrants afraid to call authorities in an emergency. They also argue that local police have no obligation to detain undocumented immigrants for the federal government, because immigration detainers don’t carry the same legal weight as a criminal warrant signed by a judge.

Trump in his first term curtailed sanctuary cities’ access to some Justice Department crime-fighting grants, prevailing after a long legal fight; his boosters now want him to go far beyond that. That could require an executive order blocking other funding mechanisms to immigrant-friendly states and cities, said Matthew Lawrence, associate dean at the Emory University law school and former attorney at the White House budget office.

Local governments would have to sue and convince judges that Trump’s actions were unlawful, and they’d have a good case, Lawrence said: Spending decisions are the purview of Congress, not the president. But it could take years for the legal questions to be resolved, potentially starving states and cities of funding they desperately need, depending how courts rule on numerous appeals.

Stephen K. Bannon, who served as a top White House adviser to Trump during his first administration, told The Post he believes Trump will be “remorseless” in rescinding federal funds - and possibly authorizing criminal prosecutions - of states and municipalities that do not follow the law and deportation efforts.

“This sanctuary cities thing will be an early administration showdown, and I believe Trump will come down as hard as you can see,” Bannon said in an interview. “The sanctuary cities movement will be finished under President Trump - he’s not going to play any games here; this is too important to the country. You can’t play too smashmouth with this crowd; you have to do it early, and you have to do it hard.”

Denver, Chicago and New York City could all be potential targets, Bannon said. Trump has lambasted Chicago in particular over the years as crime-ridden and corrupt and suggested that states and localities led by Democrats should get less federal assistance than those led by Republicans.

“I think Chicago is going to be made an example of,” added one of the people familiar with the planning.

“Frankly, they should have gone after the sanctuary cities when it first started,” Newt Gingrich, a Trump adviser and former Republican House speaker, said in an interview. “Now the easy thing is, you don’t have to be tough about it. You simply suspend all payments.”

The outside “DOGE” panel could weigh in, too. Trump deputized Musk and Ramaswamy to attack federal spending at all levels, from the Defense Department to health research grants to the federal workforce. Advisers to the group say potential moves - which in some cases may not require congressional approval - could combine its charge to slash federal spending with action designed to cow local and state officials into cooperating with the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown, the people said.

Trump vowed in his campaign to challenge the 1974 law limiting the executive’s ability to unilaterally cancel spending - a plan spearheaded by Russell Vought, whom Trump has named to lead the White House budget office. If that untested legal strategy succeeds, it could give the White House more leverage to cut funds to cities.

Johnson, the mayor of Chicago, said earlier in November that his city would continue its policy of noncooperation with federal immigration officials. The threats from Trump allies could present a staggering blow to Chicago’s finances and to other jurisdictions looking to shield undocumented immigrants from what Trump has called a “mass deportation” campaign: Federal grants make up nearly 20 percent of Johnson’s $17.3 billion 2025 budget.

Johnson told The Post that Trump is pursuing a policy of mass deportations to distract the public from his agenda to cut taxes for corporations and the rich. Chicago officials are preparing how to respond to potential cuts to their federal funds, according to one person familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe private deliberations.

“We’re not intimidated or in the least bit afraid of threats that wish to undermine our values or any effort to separate working people from one another,” Johnson said. “I’m certainly not going to compromise our local police department’s work by adding a component of their work that is not just.”

In the District of Columbia, where Congress and the federal government have potentially vast authority over local affairs, leaders appear to be trying to strike a balance between expressing support for more liberal values and angering an incoming president who has already voiced disdain for the city and threatened local autonomy.

Earlier this month, in her first remarks after the election, Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D) did not detail specific plans to respond to Trump’s immigration policies but said she believed undocumented immigrants would be “vulnerable” during his new term.

In 2020, the D.C. Council passed legislation limiting jail officials’ cooperation with federal immigration authorities. But D.C. Council Chairman Phil Mendelson (D) said that with Trump returning and Republicans in Congress more focused on D.C. than ever, he saw it as “unnecessary and provocative” to broadcast the city’s sanctuary status. Council member Christina Henderson (I-At Large) said the challenge is that D.C. is not like other sanctuary cities because, unlike Los Angeles or Chicago, the federal government can control the city’s policies - complicating any resistance effort.

A spokesman for the mayor’s office declined to comment Tuesday on how the administration was preparing for the possibility of funding cuts over immigration and referred The Post to Bowser’s previous comments.

The D.C. region is home to one of the nation’s largest Salvadoran immigrant communities, which includes tens of thousands of people who hold temporary protected status, according to the George Mason Center for Immigration Research. Bowser said she would continue to advocate for a pathway to citizenship for residents with TPS protection.

Members of Congress who are eager to back up Musk and Ramaswamy’s push for cuts to government have said they’ll use public hearings and oversight authority to pressure local officials to comply with Trump’s immigration agenda.

“I’d like to talk to the governors of sanctuary states and the mayors of sanctuary cities and have them come before our committee and explain why they deserve federal dollars if they’re going to harbor illegal criminal aliens in their states and their cities,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Georgia) said Sunday on Fox News. Greene, a GOP firebrand and Trump loyalist, will lead a DOGE oversight subcommittee.

Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-New Jersey), a member of the House Judiciary Committee, also said on Fox Business on Monday that Congress should explore making state and local taxes fully deductible only for residents of jurisdictions that don’t harbor undocumented immigrants. Trump’s 2017 tax cuts capped the amount of state and local taxes that can be deducted on federal tax returns at $10,000, which has especially rankled officials from many blue states.

- - -

Jenny Gathright, Meagan Flynn and Elizabeth Dwoskin contributed to this report.