2nd Circuit Court of Appeals rules Trump admin can withhold grants from 'Sanctuary Cities'

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,929
142
106
Appeals court rules Trump administration can withhold grants from 'sanctuary cities'
A federal appeals court on Wednesday ruled that the Department of Justice (DOJ) could withhold funding from cities and states that refuse to cooperate with the Trump administration's crackdown on undocumented immigrants.

A three-judge panel on the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously overturned a district court judge's ruling that the department lacked the authority to impose immigration-related conditions on certain funding.

The panel’s opinion, written by Judge Reena Raggi, found that Congress had delegated authority to the attorney general to set conditions on the federal grant program it had created, called the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program.

“Repeatedly and throughout its pronouncement of Byrne Program statutory requirements, Congress makes clear that a grant applicant demonstrates qualification by satisfying statutory requirements in such form and according to such rules as the Attorney General establishes,” wrote Raggi, who was appointed to the court by George W. Bush. “This confers considerable authority on the Attorney General.”

A group of seven states and New York City sued the DOJ in 2017 after then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced that the agency would start withholding funding from local governments that refused to share information about undocumented immigrants or provide jail access to federal authorities investigating inmates' immigration status.

The states challenging the policy are New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Washington, Massachusetts and Virginia.

Sessions announced in 2017 that the DOJ would start withholding funding from the Byrne grant program, which provides criminal justice funding, from so-called sanctuary cities that helped shield undocumented immigrants from federal authorities.

"So-called 'sanctuary' policies make all of us less safe because they intentionally undermine our laws and protect illegal aliens who have committed crimes,” Sessions said at the time. “These policies also encourage illegal immigration and even human trafficking by perpetuating the lie that in certain cities, illegal aliens can live outside the law."

"From now on, the Department will only provide Byrne JAG grants to cities and states that comply with federal law, allow federal immigration access to detention facilities, and provide 48 hours notice before they release an illegal alien wanted by federal authorities," he added. "This is consistent with long-established cooperative principles among law enforcement agencies."

The states' lawsuit argued that the attorney general's coercion was unconstitutional.
"DOJ has thus forced the States into an untenable position: accept unlawful and unconstitutional conditions that diminish our sovereign ability to set our own law enforcement priorities and protect our communities, or forfeit Byrne JAG funding, thus undermining the vital programs that such funding supports," they wrote.

It's really simple, if you don't agree with the Attorney General's rules then don't take the grant money. You can't have it both ways! Also, who in this forum really agrees that shielding criminals arrested for violent crimes makes our communities any safer? What is the point of sanctuary cities, to try and make the orange man mad while cutting off your nose to spite your face? It's ridiculous.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,425
8,388
126
the federal government has no power to regulate immigration.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,929
142
106
Fuck States Rights.
What do State rights have to do with taking grant money from the government? There are rules for every dollar of fed money given, don't like them, don't take the money. Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything they don't like, everyone knows the rules except loser district judges who like filing injunctions just because it has ties to the orange man (Executive branch).
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,929
142
106
the federal government has no power to regulate immigration.
Sure they can if they (eg states) undermine federal law:
See U.S. CONST. Amend. X. As the Supreme Court has repeatedly
observed, in the realm of immigration policy, it is the federal
government that maintains “broad,” Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S.
387, 394 (2012), and “preeminent,” power, Toll v. Moreno, 458 U.S. 1,
10 (1982), which is codified in an “extensive and complex” statutory
scheme, Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. at 395. Thus, at the same
time that the Supreme Court has acknowledged States’
“understandable frustrations with the problems caused by illegal
immigration,” it has made clear that a “State may not pursue policies
that undermine federal law.” Id. at 416. As Chief Justice John
Marshall wrote over 200 years ago, “the states have no power, by
taxation or otherwise, to retard, impede, burden, or in any manner
control, the operations of the constitutional laws enacted by congress
to carry into execution the powers vested in the general government.”
McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316, 436 (1819). This fundamental
principle, a bedrock of our federalism, is no less applicable today.
Indeed, it pertains with particular force when, as here, Congress acts
pursuant to its power under the Spending Clause. See U.S. CONST.
art. I, § 8.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,307
136
the federal government has no power to regulate immigration.
This is an interesting argument, not at all unfounded as the Constitution only grants the federal govt powers over naturalization and not immigration, but a distinction that is not likely to find acceptance in today's political climate. However, the issue here IMO is to what extent that Congress is allowed to divest its powers to regulate immigration to the executive, and to what extent the federal govt may make the States pay for the costs of regulating that immigration.
My own opinion is that the federal govt should have no authority to make the States pay for the cost of regulating immigration because: 1) immigration is federal law and forcing States to pay for the costs of federal law enforcement is de facto commandeering and thus unconstitutional, and 2) these costs of enforcing federal law, if paid by the States, would be disparate among the States.
But hey, as the Nixon's Head in a Jar said in that Futurama episode, "I know a place where the Constitution doesn't mean squat!"
 
Last edited:

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,307
136
What do State rights have to do with taking grant money from the government? There are rules for every dollar of fed money given, don't like them, don't take the money. Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything they don't like, everyone knows the rules except loser district judges who like filing injunctions just because it has ties to the orange man (Executive branch).

Look at this guy who literally has no legal understanding of this issue whatsoever except for his feels and his desire to fuck over his fellow countrymen.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,929
142
106
Look at this guy who literally has no legal understanding of this issue whatsoever except for his feels and his desire to fuck over his fellow countrymen.
Look at this guy literally ignoring 200 years of court precedent because of his allegiance to his "tribe" and wanting to fuck over his fellow community's countrymen by letting violent criminals escape detention because of their legal status and liklihood to vote for said "tribe".
See U.S. CONST. Amend. X. As the Supreme Court has repeatedly
observed, in the realm of immigration policy, it is the federal
government that maintains “broad,” Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S.
387, 394 (2012), and “preeminent,” power, Toll v. Moreno, 458 U.S. 1,
10 (1982), which is codified in an “extensive and complex” statutory
scheme, Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. at 395. Thus, at the same
time that the Supreme Court has acknowledged States’
“understandable frustrations with the problems caused by illegal
immigration,” it has made clear that a “State may not pursue policies
that undermine federal law.” Id. at 416. As Chief Justice John
Marshall wrote over 200 years ago, “the states have no power, by
taxation or otherwise, to retard, impede, burden, or in any manner
control, the operations of the constitutional laws enacted by congress
to carry into execution the powers vested in the general government.”
McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316, 436 (1819). This fundamental
principle, a bedrock of our federalism, is no less applicable today.
Indeed, it pertains with particular force when, as here, Congress acts
pursuant to its power under the Spending Clause. See U.S. CONST.
art. I, § 8.
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,982
3,318
126
Look at this guy literally ignoring 200 years of court precedent because of his allegiance to his "tribe" and wanting to fuck over his fellow community's countrymen by letting violent criminals escape detention because of their legal status and liklihood to vote for said "tribe".
your too funny!!!!
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,307
136
Look at this guy literally ignoring 200 years of court precedent because of his allegiance to his "tribe" and wanting to fuck over his fellow community's countrymen by letting violent criminals escape detention because of their legal status and liklihood to vote for said "tribe".

Your copy and paste bullshit is not precedent for anything, and my tribe has nothing to do with this. I'm a registered independent. The problem from my perspective is that your cult of racists wants me to pay the costs of enforcing your govt policy of racism, partly because your cult believes every brown person is a violent criminal, but especially because your cult doesn't believe in paying for ANY of its costs.
 
Reactions: JEDIYoda

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,929
142
106
Your copy and paste bullshit is not precedent for anything, and my tribe has nothing to do with this. I'm a registered independent. The problem from my perspective is that your cult of racists wants me to pay the costs of enforcing your govt policy of racism, partly because your cult believes every brown person is a violent criminal, but especially because your cult doesn't believe in paying for ANY of its costs.
Yes, truly independent by the look of post history. I guess I'm an ancap libertarian then? lol.

Nobody is forcing the states to take the money, nobody is "paying" for anything.

"...your cult believes that every brown person is a violent criminal..." Congrats! New sig material!
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,982
3,318
126
Your copy and paste bullshit is not precedent for anything, and my tribe has nothing to do with this. I'm a registered independent. The problem from my perspective is that your cult of racists wants me to pay the costs of enforcing your govt policy of racism, partly because your cult believes every brown person is a violent criminal, but especially because your cult doesn't believe in paying for ANY of its costs.
I nominate this for post of the year so far!!
Some people try to hide their brand of racism behind government policy!!
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,982
3,318
126
Yes, truly independent by the look of post history. I guess I'm an ancap libertarian then? lol.

Nobody is forcing the states to take the money, nobody is "paying" for anything.

"...your cult believes that every brown person is a violent criminal..." Congrats! New sig material!
Truth hurts, huh??
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,929
142
106
I nominate this for post of the year so far!!
Some people try to hide their brand of racism behind government policy!!
Legal status is now racist? My oh my, look who's assigning the skin color in this thread. Can't say I'm shocked.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,307
136
Yes, truly independent by the look of post history. I guess I'm an ancap libertarian then? lol.

Nobody is forcing the states to take the money, nobody is "paying" for anything.

"...your cult believes that every brown person is a violent criminal..." Congrats! New sig material!

No, you're a rabid authoritarian trying desperately to undermine the proposition that all persons are created to which our country was founded upon. Because freedom and equal opportunity put you at a disadvantage and you know it.

And no one looks at sigs anymore, guy. I'm on mobile here, not the website.
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,532
13,104
136
He's a bitter Trumper in a blue state lashing out impotently. Don't make it any grander than it really is.
He is on record here stating that the GOP and Russia are just conservatives with a lot in common. No sarcasm tag.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,929
142
106
No, you're a rabid authoritarian trying desperately to undermine the proposition that all persons are created to which our country was founded upon. Because freedom and equal opportunity put you at a disadvantage and you know it.

And no one looks at sigs anymore, guy. I'm on mobile here, not the website.
So what if I told you I was a brown person? But my cult only believes that all brown people are violent criminals? You need to step out of the echo chamber for a bit and realize that many minorities, not just myself, are for Trump. You can cry all day about skin color and I'll just laugh at your racist behavior.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,929
142
106
He is on record here stating that the GOP and Russia are just conservatives with a lot in common. No sarcasm tag.
Yes, they are. I'd love to live in Russia if it had a Constitution like ours and didn't censor the F out of their populace. You think I'd be allowed to post here if this was Russia? lol, let me know when they unban encrypted Telegram. However, they get many things correct like traditionalism and religion and strong borders.
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,532
13,104
136
Yes, they are. I'd love to live in Russia if it had a Constitution like ours and didn't censor the F out of their populace. You think I'd be allowed to post here if this was Russia? lol, let me know when they unban encrypted Telegram. However, they get many things correct like traditionalism and religion and strong borders.
The art of the back stroke while still doubling down. K k comrade.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,307
136
So what if I told you I was a brown person? But my cult only believes that all brown people are violent criminals? You need to step out of the echo chamber for a bit and realize that many minorities, not just myself, are for Trump. You can cry all day about skin color and I'll just laugh at your racist behavior.

Many 'minorities' are opposed to the proposition that all persons are created equal, so I don't quite see your point. In fact, the most common argument of white supremacists, ironically, is that only white people are 'capable' of understanding this fundamental principle of classical liberalism. They're wrong, of course.
But thanks for the heads up that all racists, of any race, are for Trump.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |