They’re lawless. They shouldn’t be called sanctuary cities.
Winning!
What a diefferent state than here in commie CA
One reason the 5th likely ruled that our law would hold up in Federal is because existing federal laws and regs already back it. To be frank (or even John), any entity that takes federal funds has a legal obligation to follow federal regulations/laws. The grantor/lendor (federal government) has a legal obligation (meaning the agencies have to do it) to ensure that the grantee/lendee is abiding by those regs, or cut the funds.
This is why Jerry Brown is playing a snake game in Cali.
By the way, I’m still waiting for those bellweather wins again George P and Sid that he media claimed would happen last week. Suck it, media!
As an aside, does Austin hold fugitives from other states or countries for extradition?
Tra la la, la la la la
Wait. The 9th Circuit will definitely weigh in on this, and SCOTUS will be forced to state the obvious. But not until a stay on execution has been in effect in the interim.
“Controversial?” For upholding federal law?
In a sense, this was settled a few years ago when SCOTUS struck down Arizona’s immigration law. Justice Kennedy, of all people, said the states do not have the right to supercede federal law. If that was true in Arizona, it should be true in California, Colorado, Texas and other places that claimed to be “sanctuary cities”.
We knew that the Obama Administration was never going to lift a finger to challenge them but the Trump Administration is a different animal and it would seem they would be contradicting themselves to let sanctuary cities/states stand after forcing Arizona to stand down.
They will be welcome in CA
Winning
Those in Austin are deeply saddened...but they’re not paying attention today as someone is trying to blow them all up with package bombs!
Here’s an idea - force your elected officials to Stop Importing Trouble to your communities. The nuts that are already here are out of control as it is.
Just sayin’.