Law & Crime Article RatingTrump blocked from enforcing 'sanctuary jurisdiction' cuts by judge who has seen this before
- Bias Rating
- Reliability
70% ReliableGood
- Policy Leaning
10% Center
- Politician Portrayal
-25% Negative
Continue For Free
Create your free account to see the in-depth bias analytics and more.
By creating an account, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Policy, and subscribe to email updates.
Bias Score Analysis
The A.I. bias rating includes policy and politician portrayal leanings based on the author’s tone found in the article using machine learning. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral.
Sentiments
-30% Negative
- Liberal
- Conservative
| Sentence | Sentiment | Bias |
|---|---|---|
Unlock this feature by upgrading to the Pro plan. | ||
Reliability Score Analysis
Policy Leaning Analysis
Politician Portrayal Analysis
Bias Meter
Extremely
Liberal
Very
Liberal
Moderately
Liberal
Somewhat Liberal
Center
Somewhat Conservative
Moderately
Conservative
Very
Conservative
Extremely
Conservative
-100%
Liberal
100%
Conservative
Contributing sentiments towards policy:
63% : Orrick, a Barack Obama appointee, noted that the government's actions were strikingly similar to executive action taken by Trump during his first time in office, in 2017 -- which also led to the judge issuing a block.50% : In his ruling, the judge notes that the administration wasn't specific in what exactly makes a locality a "sanctuary jurisdiction," but the goal of the combined action from Trump and Bondi was clear.
49% : "And as the order that will follow this one makes plain, the Cities and Counties have also shown a likelihood of success on the merits of their Administrative Procedure Act ("APA") claim: the Bondi Directive's order to freeze all DOJ funds is likely arbitrary and capricious, contrary to the Constitution and an ultra vires final agency action under the APA," the judge added.
48% : "I will enter an order that discusses the issues and my reasoning in more detail at a later date.
46% : From the order (citations omitted): Precedent in the Ninth Circuit and the orders of this court show why the Cities and Counties have established that they are likely to prevail on the merits of at least their separation of powers, Spending Clause, and Fifth and Tenth Amendment claims.
44% : The 2025 Executive Orders' directives to withhold or freeze federal funding to sanctuary jurisdictions also violate the Tenth Amendment because they impose coercive condition intended to commandeer local officials into enforcing federal immigration practices and law.
*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.
