Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: PROCON

Good question. I think you’re right. Some judge or six will say that the Feds can’t withhold funds from sanctuary cities. The judiciary is way stacked against Trump. And I’m inclined to think he doesn’t have nearly enough of his team in place to adequately fight them all in court. It’s gonna be one helluva slog.


18 posted on 03/30/2017 1:07:14 PM PDT by be-baw (still seeking)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]


To: be-baw

I thought I could stop asking this for at least the next four years, but...is it time to start shootin’ ‘em yet?


21 posted on 03/30/2017 1:09:07 PM PDT by JimRed ( TERM LIMITS, NOW! Building the Wall! TRUTH is the new HATE SPEECH.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: be-baw

He is waiting for that 5th USSC Justice!


22 posted on 03/30/2017 1:10:11 PM PDT by Reily
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: be-baw
Good question. I think you’re right. Some judge or six will say that the Feds can’t withhold funds from sanctuary cities.

There actually is a legitimate question about how much federal funding can be withheld from sanctuary cities. The original Obamacare statute would have withheld all Medicaid funding from states that didn't expand Medicaid in accordance with Obamacare; the Supreme Court, in the same decision that upheld the constitutionality of the individual mandate, struck down that portion of the statute on the grounds that it was too "coercive" of state governments.

36 posted on 03/30/2017 1:25:04 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson