SAFE Cities Act Allows Federal Government to Label Localities as 'Anarchist' and Cut Grant Funding

The Stop Anarchists From Endangering Cities Act, or the SAFE Cities Act, sets up a new, powerful mechanism for the federal government to intervene in local governance. Essentially, this bill allows the Attorney General (AG), working with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), to create a public list of what they call “anarchist jurisdictions” (SEC. 3).

The Federal Report Card: How Your City Gets Graded

So, what puts a city or state on this list? The definition of an “anarchist jurisdiction” is pretty broad and relies on subjective judgment (SEC. 2). They’re looking for places that the federal government decides have refused to take “reasonable steps” to stop violence or property destruction. Specifically, the AG will check four main things: whether local rules stop police from controlling major, ongoing chaos; whether the jurisdiction has stopped police from working in areas they are legally allowed to; whether the jurisdiction has cut funding or power from its law enforcement agencies; and whether the jurisdiction “unreasonably” turns down federal law enforcement help (SEC. 3).

This is where things get interesting—and potentially messy. Terms like “reasonable steps” and “unreasonably turns down help” are highly subjective. One city might decide that pulling back police during a tense protest is a tactical, reasonable step to de-escalate violence, while the federal government might see that same action as a failure to control the situation. Because the standard is so vague, it gives federal officials a lot of discretion to target jurisdictions whose policing philosophies or budgets they disagree with.

The Real-World Cost of the Label

Once a jurisdiction lands on this list—which must be published within 14 days of the bill becoming law and updated every 180 days—the financial hammer drops. The Director of the OMB is directed to instruct all federal agencies to restrict or otherwise treat these labeled jurisdictions “unfavorably” when distributing federal grants, provided the agency has the legal discretion to do so (SEC. 3).

Think about what federal grants pay for. They fund everything from infrastructure improvements—the roads you drive on and the bridges you cross—to essential social programs, public housing maintenance, and even local law enforcement technology upgrades. If your city or state is labeled an “anarchist jurisdiction,” the federal government is basically mandated to try and cut off that funding stream. For the regular person, this means less money for fixing potholes, fewer resources for local schools, or delays in crucial community projects, all because of a designation made hundreds of miles away in D.C.

This move effectively creates a mechanism for the federal government to punish local governments financially for exercising their autonomy, particularly regarding how they choose to budget for or deploy their police forces. While the stated goal is to ensure public safety, the practical effect is that residents of the targeted city or state—who rely on those federal dollars for basic services—are the ones who ultimately pay the price for a political disagreement over policing strategy.