Saw a headline today about how the DOJ is considering whether it can arrest politicians in sanctuary cities. The article was based on a number of comments and not any official policy as of now. Its unlikely even an administration as backward as this one would not have lawyers telling them that this would almost definitely be unconstitutional.
Still it is interesting when an administration that claims to favor State's rights only does so is the States exercise rights they agree with.
States which pass restrictive voting rules need the right to do so, but states that want to protect some of its residents aren't allowed to do so.
Refusing to provide the Federal Government with free labor to enforce a law it doesn't agree with, especially when the Federal Government just said that the taxes paid by their citizens are no longer fully deductible, seems perfectly legal to me.
It would certainly be an interesting Supreme Court case when a States Rights majority would have to rule on an issue suppressing States Rights.
Cities were always one of the places people could go to in order to escape oppression. City air was free air in the middle ages since a peasant escaping to the city got "sanctuary" from his feudal lord.
Its a long tradition that predates the founding of this country.
The immigrants in question are not accused of additional crimes outside of immigration related ones so they don't actually constitute a danger.
Most immigrants don't despite the rhetoric coming from the dotard.
Some do, of course, but crime isn't restricted to our immigrant community, or for that matter to our minority community, although looking at our prisons you might think it almost is.
Of course prisons is a whole different topic.
No comments:
Post a Comment