Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, the judges are upholding the law and the constitution. The President of the USA is not a dictatorship position and this is why we have checks and balances in place
You're cherry picking laws. Sanctuary cities are defying the law. Trump has the authority to do what he's done. It's liberal Obama-era judges who are making decisions based on politics -- not law.
In the end it's no biggie. The feds will invade safe-houses for illegals and deport even more illegals in the process.
You're cherry picking laws. Sanctuary cities are defying the law. Trump has the authority to do what he's done. It's liberal Obama-era judges who are making decisions based on politics -- not law.
What law, how are they defying it and how does this mesh with previous Supreme Court rulings?
Quote:
In the end it's no biggie. The feds will invade safe-houses for illegals and deport even more illegals in the process.
They can do that. They can raid businesses hiring illegals also. For some reason they won't.
Big problem though, when the White House was asked to define a "Sanctuary City" they said it is any City that does not comply with 8 U.S.C 1373, but there is not a LE agency in the US that violates that section so it's clear that DOJ and the White House haven't even thought through the question of what a sanctuary city is.
When a city and its police department accepts a federal grant [our tax dollars, a grant is a gift] usually from the department of justice, there are always strings attached in the agreement as to how/where/on what the money will be spent. So, options available to the department of justice- don't give anymore money to sanctuary cities, the agreement should have a clause that states 'in accepting these funds, you must/will enforce all laws pertaining to criminal aliens. If you don't, the funds will be withdrawn'.
When a city and its police department accepts a federal grant [our tax dollars, a grant is a gift] usually from the department of justice, there are always strings attached in the agreement as to how/where/on what the money will be spent. So, options available to the department of justice- don't give anymore money to sanctuary cities, the agreement should have a clause that states 'in accepting these funds, you must/will enforce all laws pertaining to criminal aliens. If you don't, the funds will be withdrawn'.
Why is it so hard for you to understand that states can NOT enforce federal immigration laws?
A US judge has blocked Trumps attempt to withhold funds from sanctuary cities. The news is unfolding, but evidently the cities are "entitled" to federal funds even if they do not co-operate with ICE.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
