Trump’s Sanctuary Cities Order Blocked by Federal Judge

That said, he acknowledged that granting the preliminary injunction doesn’t block the Trump administration from enforcing existing conditions of federal grants, or developing regulations around or defining what makes a sanctuary jurisdiction.

www.wsj.com...

There is still plenty that the Trump Admin can do, and Orrick said as much

a reply to: ketsuko

I think the thought is Gorsuch vs what Hillary would appoint. It only going to get better over the next couple appointments

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance
Where the heck were these activist judges when Obama threatened to cut federal funding to any state who refused to allow pedophiles predators to get naked in front of little girls in showers and bathrooms?

Hypocrites.

that comment shows you know as much about the 'law' as Trump's entire cabinet.

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: eisegesis

None of this matters because Gorsuch was appointed to the SCOTUS.

This means that it is only a matter of time before Trump reinstates his travel ban and dismantles sanctuary cities.

At the end of the day it's the $ that talks, Trump knows this, Sessions knows this.

I'm all in favor of stripping sanctuary cities of their federal funding.

.

Isnt it sad that is how it works. GOP got to pack the court, so no matter how things turn out they get to shaft the country for years with Gorsuch rulings.

just wait till there are 2 or 3 more
hillary really really let the left down
it will be generations before the impact of this election will be changed

so the judge is saying that the government (the taxpayers) have to give money to law enforcement in cities that prohibit law enforcement from enforcing the law.
I doubt that the supreme court will uphold that unconstitutional judgment.

a reply to: Tardacus

The supreme court will not uphold this, but that is not the lefts plan. All they want to do is delay. The american people will tire of their actions and put them out in 18. What little ground they had will be lost; they wouldn't show up in numbers for the potus election what makes you think any of them will show up for midterms.

They keep doing this just so they can say "Look! Drumpf didn't do anything in his first 100 days!"

That'll be the narrative in the coming days, while everyone already knows the Democrats have been blocking and delaying everything as much as possible instead of actually running the country. The funny part is he still did a lot more than Obama did.

This is why we need AI judges.

a reply to: eisegesis

What's next, a tax sanctuary for the rich?

uh....you know that already exists, right?

a reply to: eisegesis
Are you #ing kidding me!? Again with this entitlement bull#! I am sick and tired of it. they need to just send federal marshals to the judges courtroom and give them the ultimatum right then and there " either you stop obstructing justice and the function of government, or you will be arrested right now for dereliction of duty and failure to comply with a lawful directive" . Period. Its time to start arresting these anti-constitutional judges, and make an example.

Stop playing with kid gloves Trump and Sessions, and start #ing arresting government officials who refuse to carry out their duties and obstruct justice. Simple as that. If your #ing city is so hot # that you can disregard lawful directives on immigration policy, then you don't need federal money and go hold your hands out to the illegal fugitives you are harboring. WTF!?

The house has control of the purse

Not the president

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: eisegesis

What's next, a tax sanctuary for the rich?

uh....you know that already exists, right?

Four people think I'm an ignorant conspiracy virgin.

LOL

"Really don't mind if you sit this one out
My word's but a whisper, your deafness a shout"

"Thick as a brick" is a phrase meaning stubbornly dumb, as one's head is so thick that no new thoughts can enter it. The song starts with Ian Anderson expressing his low expectations for his target ("I may make you feel but I can't make you think") before singing about class structures, conformity, and the rigid moralistic beliefs of the establishment that perpetuates it.

I've never read anything you've ever typed either.

Trump could pull a play from the big o's playbook and get the doj to pursue consent decrees against ALL the sanctuary cities that fail to enforce the law. Trumps doj, like the big o's, can then force the cities to bend to their will and enforce existing law.

originally posted by: rockintitz
a reply to: eisegesis

So a judge from a sanctuary city says nuh uh you have to keep giving us money.

Am I reading this correctly?

A "so-called" judge. The judges on TV are more legitimate than this one. Judge Orrick personally raised $200,000 for President OBAMA.

insider.foxnews.com...

This has to be so frustrating for Donald Trump. A businessman who is not used to having his requests and orders ignored, or slapped down, like he's now experiencing as the President.

a reply to: carewemust

Yeah.
Poor guy.

Who knew? Laws and stuff.

originally posted by: Ahabstar
Just cut ALL federal funding to the entire state that has sanctuary cities. By all, I mean evict section 8, food stamps, Medicaid matching funds, and especially politician retirement funds and payroll.


When Bill Clinton doesn't get his check for being an ex-president then some stuff will get done PDQ.

As long as people in those states do not have to pay federal taxes I have no problem with your proposal of with holding state funding.

States do not get to pick and choose which Federal laws they want to follow. What happens when some southern state decides to start segregating schools? This judge just created a precedent.

I have always been in favor of less federal control over states, but there are certain powers that are given to the federal government for a reason. Immigration control is one of those powers. Illegal immigration affects the entire country, and it is not up to the states to make their own laws about that.

Trump's EO just told the states to start obeying the law that already exists. Trump did not make up the law. He told them to enforce it. And it is already written in to most state grants that they are permitted only if the state does not violate federal law. So, Trump's EO said to start enforcing that as well.

Other presidents have had EO's that did the same thing. Obama, Bill Clinton, etc. This judge is way out of line, and made a decision based on political bias.

originally posted by: eisegesis
ILLEGAL “IMMIGRANTS” ARE NOT PROTECTED BY THE CONSTITUTION!!!

That is incorrect. Anyone trying to enter the country or currently in the country citizen or otherwise is protected by the Constitution. PLUS there are also international laws regarding human treatment that need to be obeyed as well.

originally posted by: Konduit
They keep doing this just so they can say "Look! Drumpf didn't do anything in his first 100 days!"

That'll be the narrative in the coming days, while everyone already knows the Democrats have been blocking and delaying everything as much as possible instead of actually running the country. The funny part is he still did a lot more than Obama did.

A key part of "running the country" is making sure that unconstitutional bull# gets shot down as soon as possible before it can become entrenched into the system.

originally posted by: worldstarcountry
a reply to: eisegesis
Are you #ing kidding me!? Again with this entitlement bull#! I am sick and tired of it. they need to just send federal marshals to the judges courtroom and give them the ultimatum right then and there " either you stop obstructing justice and the function of government, or you will be arrested right now for dereliction of duty and failure to comply with a lawful directive" . Period. Its time to start arresting these anti-constitutional judges, and make an example.

Stop playing with kid gloves Trump and Sessions, and start #ing arresting government officials who refuse to carry out their duties and obstruct justice. Simple as that. If your #ing city is so hot # that you can disregard lawful directives on immigration policy, then you don't need federal money and go hold your hands out to the illegal fugitives you are harboring. WTF!?

So you want Trump to institute a military dictatorship and overthrow the court system?