Democrats attempts to nullify federal law

Karl Rove:
...
Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio reject federal law regarding criminal aliens in their municipal justice systems in order to protect “diversity.” Particularly tone-deaf, Mr. Emanuel said he wanted people to know “you are welcome in Chicago as you pursue the American Dream.”

Leave it to liberals to argue that people arrested for felonies—some violent crimes against persons, some crimes against property—are pursuing the American Dream. Nor does “diversity” provide a basis for these officials to nullify federal law within their cities.

During the campaign, much that candidate Trump said was meant for shock value and to serve his immediate political needs. But whenever he dealt with violent acts by illegal aliens, he displayed raw, deep emotion. This issue was personally important to him: He had several visits with families whose loved ones were killed by illegal aliens, and relatives of victims spoke at his rallies or appeared in ads. For the president and many other Americans, the idea of sanctuary cities and potentially sanctuary states (New York and California) is disturbing.

There are work-arounds. After the sheriff in Travis County, Texas, said she would no longer cooperate with federal immigration detainers for illegal aliens in her custody, ICE officials obtained federal warrants that the sheriff could not ignore. But why not simply honor the law without forcing ICE to jump through extra hoops?

Part of it is politics. Take hyperambitious Rep. Joaquin Castro. The Texas Democrat says Congress should consider impeaching Mr. Trump if he defies a judicial stay on his 90-day immigration freeze from seven countries. But Mr. Castro supports sanctuary cities that proudly flout federal law.

Trump Derangement Syndrome is also becoming prevalent, and so far its most bizarre expression is the ballot effort to make California an independent nation. Memo to the Golden State: Secession was decisively settled at Appomattox in April 1865.

Today’s nullifiers are entitled to challenge in court the underlying statutory authority of federal requests for information and cooperation or Mr. Trump’s threat to withhold federal funds. But they aren’t entitled to ignore federal statutes at whim.
...
In most of the country, there is deep opposition to sanctuary cities and the justification for them just does not add up.  There has been a call to defund these cities and jurisdictions and use the money for building a border wall.

Sheriffs from around the country dispute Democrat contentions that illegals are more likely to report crime in sanctuary cities.  Others have also discovered there is little data to support the Democrats' contentions about reporting crime.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Another one of those Trump stories Ted Cruz warned about

Iraq says civilian casualties in Mosul caused by ISIS booby trap, not US air strike