California wanted to play games in attempting to blow off federal law on illegal aliens. They were virtue signaling at a high level, and now they’re going to be in a dog fight
(Fox News) The Trump Justice Department filed a lawsuit Tuesday night against California, saying three recently-passed state laws were deliberately interfering with federal immigration policies.
It marked the latest legal and political confrontation with the nation’s most populous state, which the federal government says has repeatedly stood in the way of its plans to step up enforcement actions in the workplace and against criminal aliens.
“The Department of Justice and the Trump Administration are going to fight these unjust, unfair, and unconstitutional policies,” Attorney General Jeff Sessions was expected to tell California law enforcement officers on Wednesday. “We are fighting to make your jobs safer and to help you reduce crime in America.”
The state’s Democratic governor, Jerry Brown, fired back: “At a time of unprecedented political turmoil, Jeff Sessions has come to California to further divide and polarize America. Jeff, these political stunts may be the norm in Washington, but they don’t work here. SAD!!!â€
Jerry Brown might be in for a bigger sad, because the federal government has primacy in immigration policy. Heck, Democrats made sure to tell us this when they opposed Arizona’s SB1070 immigration law, which strengthened immigration policy in the state, rather than saying “we’re not going to help the federal government.” Obama’s DOJ, which sued Arizona for daring to tighten up immigration policing, set the precedent for being In Charge of immigration policy.
One of those laws offers additional worker protections against federal immigration enforcement actions. Senior Justice Department officials have said it’s prevented companies from voluntarily cooperating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials.
Employers are mandated under the law to demand ICE agents present a warrant or subpoena before entering certain areas of the premises, or when accessing some employee records.
There’s a very good chance this one succeeds, as the California law violates the 1st Amendment, and the California law puts the businesses in the middle of choosing between following a state law and getting fined by the federales or following federal law and getting fined by the state.
Another state law dubbed known by critics as the “sanctuary state” bill protects immigrants without legal residency by limiting state and municipal cooperation with the feds, including what information can be shared about illegal-immigrant inmates.
A third law gives state officials the power to monitor and inspect immigrant detention facilities either run directly by, or contracted through, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
The second will most likely succeed, as, again, the federal government has primacy, and states must follow federal law. Especially when they’re taking federal money. The 3rd might not succeed. Regardless, there is a supremacy clause in the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution explicitly gives the federal government control over immigration policy. California officials have trotted out the 10 Amendment in the past about this, but, the power of immigration policy is reserved not for the states, but delegated to Los Federales.
Of course Sessions will go to CA and file it there so it will be sure and get tangled up in the 9th circuit. It may make it to the Supremes by 2020. Anyway, it was good to learn that Sessions is still alive.. I had started to wonder if he was still breathing.