good- those mayors are ID 10 T's Pam Bondi freezes funding for sanctuary cities after swearing in as AG
Is this legal? I thought congress controls the purse strings. What does freezing the funding actually mean?
If you haven't noticed Congress doesn't control shit anymore. It's all executive orders and the executive branch controlling spending, which is unconstitutional. They don't care though. They've even got unelected billionaires combing through government funds. All good tho. Own da libz.
It's not legal. Congress controls spending, and any spending bill appropriations not spent within 45 days of becoming law is out of compliance with the Impoundment Control Act. Unless The Exec gives Congress a written reason. It's also not legal because being a sanctuary city is not illegal, and unless being a sanctuary city is explicitly written into a bill to restrict funding, the Exec just can't pick and choose reasons to stop funding. Agreed that none of this matters to MAGA or Trump. They are all cheering his excellency's rise to Emperor while he hangs the Constitution next to his golden toilet at Mar-A-Lago.
Funding for what? The Justice Department funding? Ok. The Republicans are defunding the police I guess. Big deal. Why cant right wingers start a thread with some information? A faux mod should be better at this. What a waste.
Is this similar to what happened the last time he was in office? Court sides with Trump in 'sanctuary cities' grant fight Go GATORS! ,WESGATORS
Odd that you only posted one of the cases...and it just happened to be the one of the three that actually backed the Trump people. Sure that was coincidental. But here are the other two, that you missed: City of S.F. v. Barr, 965 F.3d 753 | Casetext Search + Citator City of Albuquerque v. Barr et al, No. 1:2020cv00371 - Document 53 (D.N.M. 2021)
Thanks, but that doesn't answer the question. For what it's worth, I Googled the incident as I thought I remembered it coming up before, I saw the January and February results, I did not see the other ones. I picked the February result because it was an appeal of the January result. But like I said, the question still stands. Go GATORS! ,WESGATORS
Okay, sure. Well both pretend that you weren't thumbing the scale hard there. To answer your question, it depends on what specifically they are cutting. They haven't even said that yet, as far as I am aware.
The term of sanctuary city is somewhat of a misnomer. If I recall the term was coined in the right-wing media and picked up by anti-immigrant politicians. If one is really concerned with reducing crime not reporting residents whose only "crime" is illegal presence in the country to ICE is actually illogical. Obtaining information from residents of a community is very often necessary to solve crimes. If undocumented immigrants refuse to cooperate with the police it will be more difficult to solve crimes. Although the crackdown on "sanctuary cities" plays well politically it's an extremely stupid strategy if the goal is to reduce crime and arrest real criminals. Viewpoints: Why police chiefs support ‘sanctuary cities’ | HeraldNet.com For America’s police chiefs, calls for enhanced enforcement of federal immigration laws bring a particular concern. Chiefs are afraid that such efforts will have the unintended consequence of actually increasing crime and making their communities less safe. The reasons for this can be found in recent incidents from some of the country’s so-called sanctuary cities. In Tucson, Arizona, for example, an undocumented man confronted and struggled with a man who tried to steal a car with children inside. The immigrant held the criminal long enough for police to arrive, then cooperated with detectives in the follow-up investigation. As a result, the suspect was charged with kidnapping, auto theft and burglary.
Sanctuary city status goes all the way back to 1979 San Francisco. There were pockets of high crime areas surrounding immigrant population centers, and local police were struggling to solve any of the crimes, because local residents were not cooperating. So SF declared itself a "sanctuary" from enforcing Federal immigration law in the hopes more residents would cooperate in solving local crimes when they had no fear of they, or a loved one being deported. It worked. And it still holds true today. Sanctuary cities have lower crime rates than similar sized, non-sanctuary cities. But, if the Feds withhold Federal funding for local LEOs, that's likely to change one way or another. Less police usually means more crime. As does removing a city's sanctuary label.
what is legal anymore? anything the skidmark wants appears to be legal. cases are being filed while damage is beign done...
like I said elsewhere, this will make human trafficking and slave labor that much easier as people become more desperate and fearful of deportation in addition, people fearing deportation are much more likely to commit violent crimes to avoid being caught, leave no witness, high speed chases, etc...
