General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNo, Jeff Sessions, you cant just strip funding from sanctuary cities to hurt immigrants
The Justice Department threatened to cut off grant funding to eight cities on Friday unless those cities provide more support to federal officials trying to crack down on undocumented immigrants. But DOJs threat is unconstitutional and is highly unlikely to survive a lawsuit.
In fact, the Justice Departments threat against these eight cities appears to be so amateurish and so poorly aligned with longstanding Supreme Court precedent that it raises serious questions about whether the threat was properly vetted.
At issue is funding for so-called sanctuary cities, a term thats often used for cities that choose not to cooperate with federal efforts to arrest immigrants.
Under the Supreme Courts anti-commandeering doctrine, the feds cannot order a state or local government to participate in a federal program. Thus, while a state or municipality may voluntarily agree to have its police force participate in federal immigration enforcement, state and local governments also have an absolute right to refuse to do so.
However, the federal government is permitted to offer states or localities a financial incentive to participate in a federal program. So the feds can create a grant program, but only make the grant money available to states or cities that comply with certain conditions which means Congress could hypothetically pass a law stating a city may only receive certain federal funds if it agrees to make its police force available for immigration enforcement.
But there are constitutional limits on the federal governments ability to impose such conditions upon a federal grant program. Among other things, the Supreme Court explained in South Dakota v. Dole, if Congress desires to condition the States receipt of federal funds, it must do so unambiguously in a way that enables the States to exercise their choice knowingly, cognizant of the consequences of their participation.
https://thinkprogress.org/jeff-sessions-amateurish-unconstitutional-assault-on-immigrants-dd6ab8a1671e
underpants
(182,958 posts)Thanks. Rec'd
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)haele
(12,686 posts)But he can't even seem to spell it when he's the one trying to tell states what to do...
Jurisdiction. The local police have little to no jurisdiction when it comes to searching out and holding undocumented people for the Federal Government if theses people are not committing crimes in their areas. Not to mention the fact the Feds are not reimbursing local police for the time and recourses to do so.
So, JBS is telling local governments to put aside their own concerns and what works to keep crime down in their communities to step in line with the Federal Masters.
Jur-is-dict-tion. I'm sure he can say it.
Going after undocumented non-criminals is the job of the Border Patrol. Not the local police.
Haele
Gothmog
(145,722 posts)Eliot Rosewater
(31,131 posts)This is based on what?
Is it based on the law and the case being heard by an honest judge?
Constitutional doctrine? Supreme Court decision?
Can you figure where I am going?
Just like the successful sexual harassment laws and suits brought to bring down O'Reilly, these laws and judges exist because liberals or democrats or honest republicans created the laws or made decisions in courts that upheld them.
Now, which party is currently packing the entire judicial system and government with sick, twisted, corrupt sycophants who dont give a shit about the law, democracy and least of all the constitution?
Sorry, you gave me an opening to rant on about why not voting or voting 3rd party is so god damn fucking stupid and dangerous.
Gothmog
(145,722 posts)The law is actually very clear here. Roberts opinion in the Affordable Care Act case on Medicaid expansion is great for the cities fighting turmp's sanctuary city fight.
Eliot Rosewater
(31,131 posts)just ignore the law, precedent and the constitution to effect their desired outcome?
All of these 3 things are useless to us if sycophants are in charge.
procon
(15,805 posts)Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III is just as incompetent as everyone else in Trump's clown car.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)You know, there are a lot of localities that are not complying with federal law as laid down in the Obergefell decision legalizing gay marriage. Do you want to cut off federal funding from those places, too? If not, why not?