President Donald Trump laid out new immigration and fraud-prevention plans during a Tuesday speech at the Detroit Economic Club, including what he described as 90-day notices directing states such as California to return people who entered the country illegally.
Trump said his administration would stop making payments to sanctuary cities starting February 1, arguing the United States “can’t afford to take in millions of people” while also covering public services.
“Starting February 1, we’re not making any payments to Sanctuary Cities or states having Sanctuary Cities because they do everything possible to protect criminals at the expense of American Citizens, and it breeds fraud and crime,” the president said.
He also announced plans to suspend nearly 8,000 Small Business Administration loans in Minnesota that he said were tied to “suspected scammers,” adding that the Department of Justice has charged almost 100 people there. Trump said a new DOJ “legal strike force” would target fraud, and that his administration would seek to revoke citizenship from naturalized immigrants convicted of defrauding Americans.
Why It Matters
Trump has opposed sanctuary policies for years, arguing that state and local law enforcement should cooperate with federal immigration enforcement. While courts have repeatedly affirmed that immigration enforcement is primarily a federal responsibility, the current administration has expanded agreements with police and sheriff’s departments willing to help arrest and detain alleged undocumented immigrants.
Meanwhile, leaders in sanctuary cities and states—including New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles—have maintained that limiting cooperation with federal immigration authorities is necessary to protect undocumented residents who have not committed crimes and to preserve trust in local government services.
What To Know
Trump’s latest remarks revive an approach that has faced legal hurdles before: tying federal funding to sanctuary policies. Past efforts to withdraw or restrict federal money—such as FEMA grants or terrorism prevention funding—have been challenged in court, and in some cases the federal government has been required to reinstate or repay funds.
Trump argued that sanctuary policies protect immigrants while placing added strain on schools, hospitals, and public benefits.
What Is a Sanctuary City?
There is no single national definition of a “sanctuary city” or “sanctuary state.” Policies vary widely by jurisdiction and were adopted at different times—some decades ago, others more recently.
In general, sanctuary policies limit how local agencies—such as police departments, sheriff’s offices, and certain social or health services—cooperate with federal immigration enforcement.
For example, a city may bar local police from participating in Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations or restrict how local public institutions share certain data with federal agencies.
Most jurisdictions with sanctuary policies still work with federal authorities on serious crimes and may transfer suspects or people convicted of crimes to federal custody after local proceedings conclude.
Supporters of sanctuary policies say these rules encourage all residents, regardless of immigration status, to use public services and report crimes without fear. Trump and many conservatives argue the policies make communities less safe by limiting immigration enforcement.
Is Minneapolis a Sanctuary City?
Minneapolis is one sanctuary jurisdiction now under heightened federal attention as immigration enforcement efforts intensify in Minnesota.
Local leaders, primarily Democrats, have defended the city’s stance, arguing that limited law-enforcement resources should prioritize violent crime and public safety rather than immigration arrests. Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, a Democrat, said in April 2025 that the city’s resources are better spent fighting crime than diverting officers to immigration enforcement.
Earlier Tuesday, Trump said “the day of reckoning and retribution is coming,” adding that ICE was not finished in Minnesota.
What People Are Saying
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, on X: “Our values and our laws are not bargaining chips. We will always defend New Yorkers, even in the face of federal threats to withhold funding.”
Minnesota Democratic Governor Tim Walz, on X: “Trump admits that this is nothing but political retribution. Minnesota voted against him three times and now he’s punishing us – putting lives at risk and wasting enormous resources in the process.”
Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, a Democrat, in a press release on a new lawsuit: “My administration will forcefully protect our residents’ rights and hold anyone accountable who abuses their power. Nobody is above the law. This lawsuit is about ensuring there is accountability for the lawless actions of the Trump administration and justice for the Chicagoans who have been wronged.”
What Happens Next
As with previous attempts to withhold or withdraw federal funding based on sanctuary policies, the administration is likely to face legal challenges from targeted cities and states. Democratic leaders in sanctuary jurisdictions have said they intend to continue protecting residents’ rights regardless of immigration status.
