A more serious threat has been revealed by America’s prolonged immigration crisis: the gradual deterioration of the rule of law. The Department of Homeland Security reports that more than 560 jurisdictions are currently sanctuary cities. In addition to disregarding federal authority, these policies erode law enforcement, encourage criminal activity, and leave regular Americans to pay the price.
Many of these jurisdictions believe that the federal government cannot reach them. However, President Trump has demonstrated that there is a potent solution already in place. The Trump administration frozen Columbia University’s federal funds after the university failed to take significant action to combat the rise in antisemitism. The outcome? adherence. Sanctuary policies may be dismantled city by city using the same strategy.
The nation urgently needs a Trump-style overhaul that is based on financial responsibility and legal pressure to restore law and order.
Sanctuary policies not only circumvent immigration enforcement, but they also place a heavy financial strain on American taxpayers, who must pay for the services, food, and shelter of those who are illegally in the country. As a result, there is an increase in crime, civic unrest, and disorder on the streets. Across left-leaning states, communities, and organizations, this top-down disobedience praises anarchy at the expense of public safety.
I find this trend extremely concerning as a lawyer and legal immigrant who firmly believes in America’s promise and the rules that uphold it. Just 4% of ICE detainer petitions were fulfilled by the New York City Department of Correction between June 2023 and July 2024. This indicates that thousands of people who were marked for deportation—many of them had committed serious crimes—were freed. Two of them later killed a Customs and Border Protection officer who was not on duty.
California is in no better shape. More than 13,000 ICE detainer petitions, including 72 pertaining to homicide accusations, have been denied by the state since 2022. It became evident that what we are witnessing is not unplanned anarchy when violent protests erupted in Los Angeles in 2025, requiring the National Guard to be called in.
The message is clear when municipal officials disregard immigration law: public safety is subordinated. They portray these measures as humanitarian and moral in their rhetoric, but who is defending the law-abiding public, company owners, and criminal victims? We need to start by determining who actually gains from these purported sanctuary laws.
The rule of law, not selective compliance, is the foundation of the United States. Our national unity is at peril due to the expanding sanctuary movement, where ideology takes precedence over enforcement. What’s to stop these jurisdictions from ignoring environmental rules, national security duties, or civil rights protections tomorrow if they may disrespect immigration law today?
Fortunately, what works has already been demonstrated.
Columbia University was held liable by President Trump’s administration in 2025 for accepting hundreds of millions of government monies while neglecting to confront antisemitic occurrences, which was a violation of Title VI. The administration halted $400 million in federal funds when the university did nothing. Columbia quickly consented to change its rules, pay a $221 million settlement, and follow the law. That’s how you take on organizations that believe they are above the law.
Sanctuary cities should be treated in the same way.
Cut off their funds first. President Trump issued an executive order in January 2017 that permits the federal government to deny grants from the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice to jurisdictions that have sanctuary policies. The impact was immediate: California lost $200 million in federal funding in 2018 and promptly started working with immigration authorities.
This policy should be expanded by President Trump, who should target Community Development Block funding, freeze HUD funds, cut FEMA relief, and revoke DOJ funding. Agencies have the authority to reroute funds to law-abiding cities and condition awards on compliance, even if sweeping defunding initiatives are blocked by the courts.
Immigration policy is intended to benefit American residents, not jeopardize their safety, as Mark Levin correctly pointed out.
Next, use the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution to sue sanctuary cities. In 2018, California was sued by Trump’s Department of Justice over Senate Bill 54, which compelled the state to reduce its safeguards for unauthorized immigrants. Similar cases are currently pending in Los Angeles, Chicago, and municipalities throughout Illinois and New Jersey, following the administration’s July 2025 filing of a new Supremacy Clause lawsuit against New York City. For officials who violate federal law, these lawsuits must go farther, requesting injunctions, civil penalties, and possibly criminal referrals.
Leaders who put residents first, protect the defenseless, and hold criminals accountable are what Americans deserve. Our country cannot survive without our laws, which are mandatory.
America First communities are growing across the nation. Showing sanctuary jurisdictions that disobedience has repercussions requires time. President Trump can safeguard our citizens and send a long-lasting message that no city is above the law by slashing funding and taking legal action.
