Tag Archives: sanctuary cities

Trump regime intensifies war on Constitution, threatens to subpoena “sanctuary cities”

Source: Politico

“The Trump administration is escalating its fight with sanctuary cities and states, warning them that they could be hit with subpoenas if they don’t come clean about policies barring or discouraging officials from sharing information about undocumented immigrants in local custody. The Justice Department sent letters Wednesday to 23 cities, counties and states demanding that they turn over all records of such policies or practices. If they fail to produce those materials, they could face a legally enforceable subpoena and — eventually — action to recover millions of dollars worth of federal grants.” [editor’s note: It seems like it’s about as easy to get a warrant as it is to fall off a log these days. Why don’t the ICE thugs do that instead of demanding that people be unconstitutionally held without charge for their convenience? – TLK] (01/24/18)


Sanctuary churches take in immigrants and take on Trump

Source: Reason
by Shikha Dalmia

“Just as law enforcement officers in sanctuary cities refuse to obey Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) orders commanding them to detain unauthorized aliens without a warrant, sanctuary churches refuse to heed anti-harboring laws that make it a criminal offense to knowingly shield or transport an ‘alien who has entered the United States in violation of the law.’ There is a big difference between the two forms of sanctuary, though. Despite all the outrage, nothing prevents Uncle Sam from hauling immigrants — even legal ones — away from any city in America for deportation. … But when it comes to sanctuary churches, ICE’s own internal administrative guidance, along with age-old custom, bars the government from engaging in confrontational enforcement activities on the premises of houses of worship.” (for publication 02/18)


ICE gang’s acting shot-caller wants to abduct mayors of “sanctuary cities”

Source: Dallas Morning News

“The head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement wants the Justice Department to prosecute mayors and other political leaders in so-called ‘sanctuary cities’ that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities. ‘We need to hold these politicians accountable for their actions,’ Thomas Homan told Fox News. ‘This isn’t the America I grew up in. We got to take these sanctuary cities on. We got to take them to court. And we got to start charging some of these politicians with crimes.’ … Homan has served as acting chief of ICE for nearly a year, replacing former Dallas-based U.S. attorney Sarah Saldana, an Obama appointee who resigned shortly after Trump’s inauguration.” [editor’s note: Apparently the America he grew up in was East Germany – TLK] (01/03/18)


Federal judge rules Trump’s sanctuary city order unconstitutional

Source: CNN

“A federal judge has permanently blocked US President Donald Trump’s executive order to cut funding from cities that limit cooperation with US immigration authorities. US District Court Judge William Orrick issued the ruling on Monday in lawsuits brought by two California counties, San Francisco and Santa Clara. Orrick said Trump cannot set new conditions on spending approved by Congress.” (11/21/17)


Federal judge blocks DoJ’s attempt to punish cities for supporting Constitution

Source: Politico

“A federal judge has blocked the Trump administration’s attempt to use Justice Department public-safety grant programs to discourage so-called sanctuary city policies aimed at protecting undocumented immigrants. Acting on a lawsuit brought by the City of Chicago, U.S. District Court Judge Harry Leinenweber issued a nationwide preliminary injunction Friday prohibiting the Justice Department from adding new grant conditions requiring cities to allow immigration agents access to local jails and insisting that local authorities give advance notice when suspected illegal immigrants are about to be released from custody.” (09/15/17)


Sanctuary cities and recreational marijuana

Source: Independent Institute
by Randall Holcombe

“Sanctuary cities deliberately refer to themselves using this confrontational terminology, indicating that they provide a sanctuary for those who are in the country illegally. They do so by refusing to aid the federal government in enforcing federal immigration law. Sanctuary cities could be less confrontational if they dropped the terminology and simply said they enforce their own laws, but they do not enforce the laws of other governments. Sanctuary cities are not shielding immigrants from federal enforcement, they just are not cooperating with the federal government to enforce federal law. My reaction to this less confrontational view of sanctuary cities is to think that local law enforcement agencies enforce local laws, and it is up to the federal government to enforce federal laws. Why should local governments be required to enforce the laws of the federal government?” (09/06/17)


Federal judge blocks Texas regime’s attempt to conscript cities as federal law enforcers

Source: US News & World Report

“A federal judge has temporarily blocked most of Texas’ tough new ‘sanctuary cities’ law that would have let police officers ask people during routine stops whether they’re in the U.S. legally [sic] and threatened sheriffs with jail time for not cooperating with federal immigration authorities. The law, known as Senate Bill 4, had been cheered by President Donald Trump’s administration and was set to take effect Friday. It was widely viewed as the toughest immigration measure in the nation since Arizona passed what critics called a ‘Show Me Your Papers’ law in 2010, which was later partially struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court. The ruling late Wednesday by U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia in San Antonio was handed down as anxieties about immigration enforcement in Texas have again flared in the wake of Tropical Storm Harvey.” (08/31/17)


Solve the sanctuary city conflict by granting statehood to cities

Source: Libertarian Institute
by Ryan McMaken

“More than 30 states have moved with varying degrees of success to rein in so-called sanctuary cities that have pledged to not assist federal agents with rounding up and prosecuting suspected illegal immigrants. … Legally speaking, it’s not clear that the cities have much of a foundation to stand on. Unlike states, which are guaranteed a certain amount of sovereignty in the US Constitution, local governments are usually creatures of the state government itself. In most states, the state government does not guarantee specific rights to specific cities and counties. County and city lines have historically been drawn and re-drawn by the state governments. While the United States is a federalist system — albeit an increasingly centralized one — state governments are not federalist, but are unitary. Thus, state-city relations are not analogous to state-federal relations. But, laws and constitutions can be changed, and political solutions can offer answers where legal ones do not.” (08/30/17)


Sessions blasts Chicago for federalist policies, touts Miami-Dade’s Good Germanry

Source: Fox News

“Attorney General Jeff Sessions praised Miami-Dade on Wednesday for shedding its ‘sanctuary’ status, while using a visit to the Florida county to draw a sharp contrast with Chicago — painting the city as a crime-ridden cautionary tale for its refusal to cooperate with the administration’s illegal [sic] immigrant crackdown. … Sessions and others in the administration have repeatedly tried to link violent crime to illegal [sic] immigration — though mayors of sanctuary cities across the country have pushed back. There are an estimated 200 to 608 local and state governments with some sort of sanctuary policy in place — however, their degree of cooperation varies. Some work with federal authorities on felony convictions while others only comply in civil investigations. There are a few places that refuse to cooperate altogether.” (08/16/17)


Sanctuary cities and the rule of law

Source: LewRockwell.com
by Andrew P Napolitano

“The concept of a sanctuary city does not mean it is a place where federal law is unenforced by the feds. Rather, it is a place where local authorities have elected not to spend their tax dollars helping the feds to enforce federal law. The term ‘sanctuary city’ is not a legal term but a political one. … Can local authorities refuse to help the feds enforce federal law? In a word, yes. There is no legal obligation on the part of local authorities to help the feds with manpower or resources or data to enforce federal law within the jurisdiction of those local authorities. During the Clinton administration, when Congress passed legislation that directed local law enforcement to enforce a federal gun registration scheme, the Supreme Court invalidated the statute. It ruled that the feds cannot commandeer local and state officials and compel them to enforce federal laws; the feds can enforce their own laws.” (08/10/17)