Jeff Sessions: We've Got to Stand Up to Sanctuary States, Cities

Breitbart ^ | August 29, 2014 | Staff

[Rufus2007]

On Mark Levin’s Thursday radio show, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) discussed the potential of President Barack Obama granting amnesty to 5 to 6 million illegal aliens by executive fiat. Sessions argued it would be an abuse of power by the White House and said it was intention to act legislatively against it.

The junior Alabama senator was also asked by host Mark Levin about sanctuary cities and states, and particular the state of California in which the state’s Democratic governor, Jerry Brown, hosted Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto and touted his state’s refusal to adhere to current federal immigration law.

“That is a fabulous question,” Sessions replied. “You’re exactly right and your listeners need to know that he has explained this precisely – we got major cities in this United States that consider themselves sanctuary cities that would not even turnover illegal aliens who committed serious felonies to the federal government.

...more (w/audio)...

[Rufus2007]

Finally someone points out that the pro-amnesty crowd is trying to have it both ways -- two sets of policies based on the political persuasion of your state's government...

[Cowboy Bob]

If the Federal government can withhold highway fund money to force the drinking age to be raised to 21, the federal government can withhold any money they want for any reason.

[ealgeone]

If the Federal government can withhold highway fund money to force the drinking age to be raised to 21, the federal government can withhold any money they want for any reason.

my thoughts exactly. cut the money off and those sanctuary cities will get religion on this issue.

[cripplecreek]

Cut the funding. If you want to force appeasers to stop, make it cost them and they’ll lose their love of illegals.

[Paine in the Neck]

If the Federal government can withhold highway fund money to force the drinking age to be raised to 21, the federal government can withhold any money they want for any reason.

The 16th Amendment and FDR's direct withholding blew the relationship between the states and fedgov apart. Once the feds got their hands on the money before the states it was inevitable that the DC monster would run out of control. I would dearly love to see all tax collections for DC be escrowed at the state level and not released to the feds without approval of governors or state legislatures. Put the leash and choke collar the right way 'round.

[grania]

Every time we read or hear something from Jeff Sessions it’s good. He does seem to be the one who has clarity and conviction on the issues. He’d be a good candidate for Pres, as he seems to have a thorough grasp of the issues we face and an ability to articulate them in a way that convinces others. Besides that, US votes might be ready for a grandfatherly figure with a lifetime of experiences, knowledge, and wisdom.

[cripplecreek]

The 16th Amendment and FDR's direct withholding blew the relationship between the states and fedgov apart. Once the feds got their hands on the money before the states it was inevitable that the DC monster would run out of control.

Yep. The 16th and 17th were the most destructive amendments.

[Himyar]

He would make a great president. However, he has been a thorn in the side of the gop-e for years. Plus he is not flashy. Since so many people vote on superficial appearance and speech making, I'm afraid he'd have a hard time attracting attention. I'd support him heart and soul, but he's my Senator so I know what a gem he is.

[stevio]

Either that or his price is so high even Soros can’t afford it.

[trebb]

Hell, fence the sanctuary entities in and tell them the fence is to keep conservatives out...

[reefdiver]

I would support him in a NY minute. But not as a VP, He’s a leader.

[OnlyRational]

I would dearly love to see all tax collections for DC be escrowed at the state level and not released to the feds without approval of governors or state legislatures. Put the leash and choke collar the right way 'round. Wouldn't that be a return to the Articles of Confederation?