Trump’s right: Sanctuary cities must work with the feds — or pay a price

President Donald Trump may face a tough legal battle to withhold federal funds from sanctuary cities and states, as he vows he will.

But eventually he’ll prevail, unless Democrats somehow manage to sway voters to back an “amnesty for all” approach, even for violent criminal illegal immigrants — and good luck with that.

Clearly these defiant, increasingly violent jurisdictions need to be restrained and forced — one way or another — to follow the law.

“Starting Feb. 1, we’re not making any payments to sanctuary cities or states” with “sanctuary cities because they do everything possible to protect criminals at the expense of American citizens,” the prez warned; “it breeds fraud and crime and all of the other problems that come.”

Actually, it’s worse than that: When cities and states ban cooperation with federal immigration authorities, they force agents to track down and arrest illegal immigrants at loose in the community, and risk resistance from activists as well as the immigrants themselves.

Cooperation would curb the chaos: For starters, local officials should honor ICE “detainers” by holding arrestees and convicts subject to deportation until federal agents can take custody of them, rather than setting them free.

That would eliminate, or at least reduce, the need for public arrests — and avoid sick, impromptu protests like that one the led to Renee Nicole Good’s death.

As we’ve noted, if activists hadn’t interfered with ICE’s legal duties, Good would still be alive.

Remember, too: Trump ran for president explicitly promising “the largest deportation in the history of our country” — and was elected with a decisive majority.

Plus, federal law takes priority over state and local law; no one has legitimate grounds to interfere with federal enforcement.

Alas, rather than remind ICE haters of that and urge calm, Democrats — like Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz — have only stoked resistance.

They’re “prioritizing politics over public safety,” fumed Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin.

Even Gov. Kathy Hochul this week urged New Yorkers to “rise up.”  

Yes, courts have frustrated Trump’s past threats to hold up funds to sanctuary jurisdictions, and may do so again.

Indeed, Mayor Zohran Mamdani boasted confidence in the “city’s ability to fight those threats,” whether “in the courts” or “beyond that.”

“Our laws cannot be bargaining chips,” he posted on X.

But this isn’t a negotiation: To repeat, federal law supersedes city law.

And eventually, higher courts will affirm that, or Republicans will pass new laws to allow funding cuts in cases of local defiance — or otherwise force states and cities to obey federal law and cooperate on immigration enforcement.

Of course, the left’s hope in causing chaos is to push swing voters to reject the GOP and so avoid both the penalties and blue-state enforcement.

But that’s no long-term answer, since burgeoning illegal populations will drive regular citizens out of blue states and empower Republicans another way.

Anti-ICE folks are free to protest peacefully, without impeding federal agents. They can work to change laws or boot pro-enforcement pols from office.

But pushing violence, obstruction and contempt for the law in the end will bring serious negative consequences, one way or another.