We are seeing the urgent need for a revolt against three institutions controlled by the left, eg the courts, the universities and the media. Trump has ample power to cut all three off at the knees. All it takes is for Ivanka to sign off on it.
Obama Judge Blocks Fed Action against Sanctuary Cities
- Thread starter Scataphagos
- Start date
Some private citizen needs to file a lawsuit against some public official or agency claiming they are knowingly allowing a criminal to live next door to them.
State & federal laws are two different things. The reason major cities are 'sanctuary cities' is due to the constitutions 10th amendment. State are follow the protocol of the law. This idea that some how every big city is harboring criminals is complete rhetoric by Trump to stir up the mob to get elected. So far every federal judge has shot down every attempt at Trump to step around the constitution. Sanctuary cities work with ICE to deport felons all the time - when the letter of the law is followed - meaning their is a court order.
In the U.S. we have states which are empowered to have their own laws. Your thinking of a kingdom were a king rules over every territory and has full authority to set the law of the land.
State & federal laws are two different things. The reason major cities are 'sanctuary cities' is due to the constitutions 10th amendment. State are follow the protocol of the law. This idea that some how every big city is harboring criminals is complete rhetoric by Trump to stir up the mob to get elected. So far every federal judge has shot down every attempt at Trump to step around the constitution. Sanctuary cities work with ICE to deport felons all the time - when the letter of the law is followed - meaning their is a court order.
In the U.S. we have states which are empowered to have their own laws. Your thinking of a kingdom were a king rules over every territory and has full authority to set the law of the land.
You know what? I really don't give a shit. Local jurisdictions' legal obligations regarding immigration and how much leverage the president can apply are interesting constitutional questions. But after decades of watching activist liberal judges make up fiat constitutional rights and seeing how brazenly political they are now, I'm not that interested in constitutional fine points. Trump's position should be these sanctuary cities will bend the fucking knee or he will crush them. He can safely ignore any judicial orders that are facially improper, eg some obscure district court judge/pol asserting a right to run the country's immigration policy. Hi s supporters won't object, they'll cheer. The republicucks in congress will assume their usual fetal position. If a wimp like Obama can do it, Trump should be able to.
Might have something to do with liberal activist judges pushing their will on the entire country. But, agree. Trump needs to figure out a way to stop that.
According to this article:
http://constitution.com/obama-administration-orders-schools-go-transgender-else/
the doj sent out letters and threatened lawsuits and to withhold funds if they didn't do the tranny stuff.
So far all that trump has done is threatened, too, but this time the judges are determined to see that it doesn't get done.
Why the difference?
We all know why.
There is no doubt the whole immigration protocol needs to be over hauled. The reason why hundreds of big city mayors and the chiefs of police support the sanctuary city is they will no longer be able to do regular police work if ICE work is delegated to them. Sanctuary cities have been in existence for many decades now - local police are all for them.
Then we should deport all illegals from non sanctuary cities to sanctuary cities and everybody would be happy. Arresting and detaining criminals IS police work. Or just pass a law that it is no longer illegal to sneak into the country illegally. Your refusal to acknowledge that violating immigration law is a crime leaves us with laws that are not enforced and outcomes dependent on the courts whims. Fine when it goes your way, but not so fine when really bad people elect really bad representatives who appoint really bad judges and the minority of old fashioned law abiders are damaged. Which is why I say we need to take this to the court and get it resolved.
This is abject nonsense. How then do non-sanctuary, ie law-abiding, cities function? Local democrat office holders and the compliant police chiefs they hire may favor sanctuary cities. I am pretty sure the vast majority of street cops do not.