Note: VERY narrow definition of sanctuary cities here ...https://twitter.com/dominicholden/status/866764602008317952 …
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Unless I missed it, DOJ never acknowledges the date of the order in the top filing. Which is just weird. Because the AG's memo is attached.
Here's my report on Judge Orrick's injunction — https://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/federal-judge-stops-administration-from-enforcing-part-of?utm_term=.npxwj1dM9b#.aepkWK8AOw … — which led to that odd "Office of the Press Secretary" WH response.
The plaintiffs' response will be the that this constitutes "voluntary cessation," meaning AG could change his interpretation at any time.
And they'll be submitting every word of this as evidence the president intends a broad interpretation of the EO.pic.twitter.com/MDxZveAc5K
[To clarify: I'm just saying, as a general legal matter, this is what will come in response—not that the plaintiffs' lawyers told me this.]
Lawyer for one of the counties in the California sanctuary cities litigation responds to AG Sessions' memo in a statement to @BuzzFeedNews:pic.twitter.com/WB5IeMWGET
Well, if the Sant Clara County counsel says so, it must be true. 
didn't they try a similar tactic over Travel Ban? voluntarily narrow order's interpretation w/o noting could just as easily re-broaden
The McGahn memo about lawful permanent residents, yes. That was on more unsure footing, tho, bc he had no clear authority to interp the EO.
McGahn = Don McGahn, White House counsel
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.