In a recent Justia blog post, Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar and co-author Michael Schaps consider the strength of San Francisco v. Trump. 

The City and County of San Francisco has filed the lawsuit against the feds focusing on a different Executive Order the President has issued—this one seeking to rein in so-called sanctuary jurisdictions. Although the term "sanctuary" lacks universal legal meaning, San Francisco has long considered itself a sanctuary city insofar as it limits its cooperation with federal immigration authorities. This Executive Order defines "sanctuary jurisdictions" narrowly as those "that willfully refuse to comply with 8 U.S.C. 1373," and essentially prevents a state or local government from having a policy or practice that forbids maintaining or giving to the feds information on the immigration status of individuals.

The Executive Order instructs cabinet officials to take enforcement action against sanctuary jurisdictions, which could include the discretionary termination of federal funding to these jurisdictions. Fear of losing federal funding, which the city claims represents about 13 percent of its budget, led San Francisco to file suit in federal court, challenging the Order and also the underlying statute (section 1373). But how likely is the lawsuit to succeed?

Read the full post at verdict.justia.com.