Court Rules Trump Admin Can Withhold Grants From Sanctuary Jurisdictions

This has made many an Open Borders advocate very upset

Appeals Court: Trump Can Withhold Funding from Sanctuary Cities

A federal appellate court on Wednesday ruled that President Trump’s administration can, in fact, withhold federal funds from sanctuary jurisdictions that insist on shielding criminal illegal aliens from arrest and deportation.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that the Trump administration has the authority to withhold federal grant money from sanctuary jurisdictions due to their failure to meet federal requirements that include abiding by federal immigration law.

The Second Circuit Appellate Court wrote in their introduction:

The principal legal question presented in this appeal is whether the federal government may deny grants of money to State and local governments that would be eligible for such awards but for their refusal to comply with three immigration‐related conditions imposed by the Attorney General of the United States.

In question was the Trump administration’s withholding 2017 Byrne Program Criminal Justice Assistance grants from the states of New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Washington, Massachusetts, and Virginia for their failure to meet federal immigration requirements due to their sanctuary policies.

In other words, if they want the money, they have to actually enforce the laws.

(Washington Times) Judge Reena Raggi, a Bush appointee to the court, said government has a valid interest in getting state and local officials to cooperate with Homeland Security — and, under the law, a tool to do so. She said jurisdictions that refuse to cooperate are flouting federal law.

“There is something disquieting in the idea of states and localities seeking federal funds to enforce their own laws while themselves hampering the enforcement of federal laws, or worse, violating those laws,” she wrote in the opinion for the three-judge panel.

However, it might work better to just arrest and charge all those state, county, and local officials who are involved with violating federal laws on illegal immigration, but, that never seems to happen.

And here are the whiners violating federal law but still wanting that money

(NY Times) “President Trump’s latest retaliation against his hometown takes away security funding from the number one terrorist target in America,” Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York City said in a statement, “all because we refuse to play by his arbitrary rules.”

“We’ll see President Trump back in court,” he added. “And we will win.”

Gurbir S. Grewal, the attorney general of New Jersey, said he was “disappointed by the ruling” and he, too, indicated that the fight was not over.

“It’s unfortunate that the federal government has decided to weaponize the federal grant funding process in order to carry out the president’s anti-immigrant agenda,” Mr. Grewal said, “but I’m confident that we will ultimately prevail in the courts.”

Enforce federal immigration laws. Heck, simply cooperate when ICE comes calling. Be passive. And then the money would flow. But, instead, these jurisdictions intentionally violate federal immigration law, actively look to thwart federal immigration agents, let illegals go when they would go after legal US citizens, shield illegals, make communities less safe by releasing hardcore criminals, etc. I’m betting de Blasio wouldn’t give money to companies and groups that wouldn’t cooperate when he was in lower level politics. And probably not now as mayor of NYC.

Want the money? Cooperate.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

3 Responses to “Court Rules Trump Admin Can Withhold Grants From Sanctuary Jurisdictions”

  1. Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

    Another victory for the President and the American people.
    After 3 years common sense prevails.


  2. Democrats have been consistently complaining that Trump acts like a dictator, yet it is the Democrats and their “resistance” mentality that has opposed everything Trump has tried to do, while Trump has taken his fight through the courts and won 9 out of 10 times. When the courts tend to side with Trump so often, one must question the motives of those who filed all those injunctions in the first place as well as the competency and bias of the judges who permitted it. Surely, all those judges knew as well as the Supreme court that their actions went contrary to established law. And they did it anyway. There is probably a word for this.

  3. Fred Haskell says:

    The odd thing is this was decided when Carter was President. He mandated 55mph over states’ rights. Some fought back. The courts ruled withholding education monies etc was a no go. But the feds could without highway funds since federal highway rules were flouted. Texas said screw you anyway and went to 75mph. Arizona did the same but the next day congress set the national 75mph and no state ended up short highway funds.

    The point is this is proof of current judicial activism as this was already settled law. So they knew they would lose and will lose at the supreme court. Not because it is “Trump’s court,” but because it is settled law.

Pirate's Cove