Sanctuary Cities

[Ex-California]

Having lived in a sanctuary city before I'm wholeheartedly against the idea.

Not because it was overrun with Mexicans, in fact, it never was because they were busy working in the Salinas fields, it was the crust punks, voluntary homeless, and huge drug addict population that ruined downtown and continues to ruin the quality of life there.

I just wanted to get the perspective of the states rights people with that question, not trying to be a "gotcha moment" fuckhead

[Fife]

The problem is separation of powers; not so much the more basic 10th amendment issue.

Trump's weapon is directing or withholding federal cash on his own initiative, without Congress being in the game at all. Take a glance at the Volokh piece I linked. It's short and sweet.

If Trump is serious about this EO as written, he's heading for a brick wall.

[Zlaxer]

@Fife


I seem to remember SCOTUS saying strings were fine as long as State wasn't forced to accept money and as long as the string is related to the funds at issue......not to mention that sanctuary cities are pretty much mini rebellions against the federal government.....

[SuburbanFarmer]

Countdown until the pro-marijuana states wake up and realize this will involve them as well....

[Speaker to Animals]

Countdown until the pro-marijuana states wake up and realize this will involve them as well....

LOL. They won't see it coming until it is too late.

[Speaker to Animals]

I just wanted to get the perspective of the states rights people with that question, not trying to be a "gotcha moment" fuckhead

I am sort of a state's rights guy. If your state wants to flaunt federal drug policy, then I don't have a problem with it. But illegal immigration actually is legitimately a federal issue. Liberal cities giving safe haven to illegal immigrants affects us all, not least among the effects being likely voter fraud since those same liberals fight tooth and nail against requiring identification to vote.

[SuburbanFarmer]

I just wanted to get the perspective of the states rights people with that question, not trying to be a "gotcha moment" fuckhead

I am sort of a state's rights guy. If your state wants to flaunt federal drug policy, then I don't have a problem with it. But illegal immigration actually is legitimately a federal issue. Liberal cities giving safe haven to illegal immigrants affects us all, not least among the effects being likely voter fraud since those same liberals fight tooth and nail against requiring identification to vote.

Why? If the states matter, then why would the Federal government be restricting immigration to them?

[Speaker to Animals]

I just wanted to get the perspective of the states rights people with that question, not trying to be a "gotcha moment" fuckhead

I am sort of a state's rights guy. If your state wants to flaunt federal drug policy, then I don't have a problem with it. But illegal immigration actually is legitimately a federal issue. Liberal cities giving safe haven to illegal immigrants affects us all, not least among the effects being likely voter fraud since those same liberals fight tooth and nail against requiring identification to vote.

Why? If the states matter, then why would the Federal government be restricting immigration to them?

Because we are one nation. If you want to call this experiment a wash, then say so, and we can all go on our way then.

[SuburbanFarmer]

I am sort of a state's rights guy. If your state wants to flaunt federal drug policy, then I don't have a problem with it. But illegal immigration actually is legitimately a federal issue. Liberal cities giving safe haven to illegal immigrants affects us all, not least among the effects being likely voter fraud since those same liberals fight tooth and nail against requiring identification to vote.

Why? If the states matter, then why would the Federal government be restricting immigration to them?

Because we are one nation. If you want to call this experiment a wash, then say so, and we can all go on our way then.

oK.. so states are 'laboratories of Democracy' until it involves immigration? Or just 'until it's inconvenient'?

[Speaker to Animals]

Why? If the states matter, then why would the Federal government be restricting immigration to them?

Because we are one nation. If you want to call this experiment a wash, then say so, and we can all go on our way then.

oK.. so states are 'laboratories of Democracy' until it involves immigration? Or just 'until it's inconvenient'?

Do states confer citizenship? No? I guess you don't have a point, then.