How a California judge’s ruling could have huge implications for the Trump administration’s sanctuary cities

Breitbart News is publishing the full text of a U.S. District Court ruling that could impact the Trump Administration’s attempts to pass a bill that would effectively make it illegal for the United States to grant sanctuary to immigrants who commit serious crimes.

The ruling from Judge Andrew Hanen in Sacramento was released yesterday.

It is an unprecedented victory for sanctuary cities, and it will be very difficult for the President and his Administration to pass this legislation without a ruling from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

If the Ninth Court holds in this case that President Trump is violating the Constitution, he will be unable to enforce his Executive Order against sanctuary cities.

But, as with the sanctuary cities cases, there is a good chance that this case will have very wide-ranging consequences.

The Ninth Circuit has held that the executive order does not violate the Fifth Amendment, but it does create a new right for the Attorney General to unilaterally declare a sanctuary city or jurisdiction a sanctuary for illegal aliens.

The federal government has always been able to designate cities as such under certain circumstances.

It can, for example, declare a city a “sanctuary city” if it has an annual budget of less than $2 million.

But the Ninth, in a landmark decision, held that such a designation is not valid if it violates a specific federal law.

As a result, the Ninth found that President Obama’s Executive Order in January 2014, which gave sanctuary cities the right to determine whether or not they should be considered “sanctuaries,” violated the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.

This decision, along with a subsequent ruling by Judge William Canby in Arizona, has set a precedent for the courts to interpret many of the President’s Executive Orders and policies.

President Trump, for instance, has argued that his executive order is not unconstitutional, and he has even issued Executive Orders that specifically permit the President to use his authority to designate any sanctuary city.

President Obama has consistently refused to take action against sanctuary jurisdictions, however, and his actions have resulted in the deaths of thousands of people.

The president has also used his executive authority to deny federal grants to sanctuary cities in California and across the nation.

President Donald Trump will be asked on Wednesday morning whether or if he will challenge Judge Hanen’s ruling to the Ninth circuit.

He has repeatedly denied this.

He tweeted today: “The Ninth Circuit ruled in my favor and the Ninth will now consider my appeal of Judge Hanon’s ruling.

The President’s executive orders, like the ones I signed into law, are not unconstitutional.

But they are illegal when they are issued by the Executive Branch.”

The President has not responded to the latest Ninth Circuit ruling, which was published yesterday.

A spokesperson for the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, who is the lead plaintiff in the case, said the agency is “encouraged” by Judge Hanens decision.

The U.F.C. has filed a brief with the Ninth Circuits Supreme Court in support of Judge Hans’s ruling, as have other groups including the National Immigration Law Center.

The American Civil Liberties Union and the American Civil Rights Union have also filed briefs in support.

Judge Hanening is the third judge on the NinthCircuit bench to declare that President Donald Trumps policies violate the Constitution.

Judge Neil Gorsuch, who was nominated to fill the position by President Donald J. Trump in February, also ruled in February that President Trumps executive orders are unconstitutional.

In January, Judge Gorsuch also ruled that PresidentTrump’s executive order in January, which granted sanctuary cities a right to choose whether or so-called “sanity” could be achieved in their jurisdictions, was illegal under the Fifth, Fourteenth, and Fourth Amendments.

In June, Judge Hanena Thomas of the U,S.

Court of Federal Claims ruled that the president’s actions to deport people in detention centers and to deny asylum to foreign nationals were unconstitutional.

This case has the potential to have wide-reaching consequences for the executive orders and policies of President Trump.