FRQ 1: Sanctuary Cities & Federalism (Unit 1)

CHICAGO — Attorney General of the United States Jeff Sessions cannot follow through, for now, with his threat to withhold public safety grant money to Chicago and other so-called sanctuary cities that have refused to impose tough new national immigration policies, a federal judge ruled Friday. “It means essential resources for public safety will not come with unlawful strings attached,” Mayor Emanuel said, “and the Trump Justice Department cannot continue to coerce us into violating and abandoning our values.” Judge Leinenweber agreed, writing that because the Constitution gives Congress the federal wallet, the president may not impose new conditions on federal grant funds to state and local municipalities. By adding conditions not imposed by the legislative branch, the Department Of Justice (DOJ), part of the executive branch, appears to be usurping Congress’ authority. Adapted from The New York Times, April 27, 2017

Use the information from the excerpt above to answer the following questions.

Describe one action the President could take if he disagreed with the outcome in the scenario.

In the context of the scenario, explain how the President’s action described in A could be affected by Congress.

In the context of the scenario, explain how the interaction between the executive and the judicial branches could be affected by the public.