Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, November 20, 2017

(Reuters) - A federal court judge in California on Monday blocked an executive order from President Donald Trump to deny some federal grants to so-called sanctuary cities, undermining the administration's crackdown on illegal immigration.

"The Counties have demonstrated that the Executive Order has caused and will cause them constitutional injuries by violating the separation of powers doctrine and depriving them of their Tenth and Fifth Amendment rights," he wrote.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

You beat me by a minute posting this. Here's the NYT version:

www.nytimes.com

#1 | Posted by Corky at 2017-11-20 11:30 PM | Reply

What can you say? Trump, and apparently his advisers, don't have a clue when it comes to the constitution. How many more times will we read, "Trump ... unconstitutional?"

#2 | Posted by et_al at 2017-11-20 11:34 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#1

Missed it by that much.

#3 | Posted by et_al at 2017-11-20 11:37 PM | Reply

www.youtube.com

#4 | Posted by Corky at 2017-11-20 11:59 PM | Reply

All you have to know is that he is an Obama-appointed judge from San Francisco.

#5 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2017-11-21 07:58 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#2 Let's not forget his moronic supporters in both houses of congress are silent about his Constitutional transgressions after 8 years of yammering about the Constitution. His voters even more so.

#6 | Posted by 726 at 2017-11-21 07:58 AM | Reply

How is it unconstitutional to make cities and states follow federal law this judge is making laws from the bench its Bull #$&^

#7 | Posted by WTFIGO at 2017-11-21 03:24 PM | Reply

"How is it unconstitutional to make cities and states follow federal law this judge is making laws from the bench its Bull #$&^"

It's not about following federal law it's about local communities having to enforce federal laws. This makes law enforcement much more difficult because illegal immigrants won't report crimes even when they are victims.

#8 | Posted by danni at 2017-11-21 03:33 PM | Reply

---It's not about following federal law it's about local communities having to enforce federal laws.

Actually what it's about is Democrats inviting more illegal immigrants AKA future Dem voters.

#9 | Posted by nullifidian at 2017-11-21 03:45 PM | Reply

If you have ever had a warrant for your arrest. You would know you would need documented proof that there was a warrant or hold on you. Simply calling it in won't cut it. What do cities hold them on??? Last time I was in trouble they could hold you for 72 hours and that's it. Even the undocumented have constitutional rights.

#10 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-11-21 03:49 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

"How is it unconstitutional to make cities and states follow federal law this judge is making laws from the bench its Bull #$&^"
It's not about following federal law it's about local communities having to enforce federal laws. This makes law enforcement much more difficult because illegal immigrants won't report crimes even when they are victims.

#8 | POSTED BY DANNI AT 2017-11-21 03:33 PM | FLAG:

That's a poor excuse how many people have been victimized by those who were let go before ICE could collect them? How would you feel if a sanctuary city new someone here illegally was a threat and let them go only to hurt someone you loved?

#11 | Posted by WTFIGO at 2017-11-21 03:54 PM | Reply

#11 | Posted by WTFIGO

Trump is a bigger threat to this country than anyone either of could name.

#12 | Posted by Zed at 2017-11-21 04:04 PM | Reply

"That's a poor excuse how many people have been victimized by those who were let go before ICE could collect them?"

"Police chiefs across the country support sanctuary cities because they keep crime down"

www.latimes.com

#13 | Posted by danni at 2017-11-21 05:17 PM | Reply

All you have to know is that he is an Obama-appointed judge from San Francisco.

Would your butt hurt less if a Reagan appointee ruled the same way? www.courthousenews.com

#14 | Posted by et_al at 2017-11-21 09:01 PM | Reply

How is it unconstitutional to make cities and states follow federal law this judge is making laws from the bench its Bull #$&^

Fundamental constructs of US constitutional law, federalism and separation of powers, make it unconstitutional. For good measure you can also throw in the Fifth and Tenth Amendments making it unconstitutional.

#15 | Posted by et_al at 2017-11-21 09:05 PM | Reply

Et Al,

Does the Constitution not enumerate to Congress the power to make immigration policy?

To me it seems that sanctuary cities fly in the face of that enumerated power.

#16 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-11-21 09:09 PM | Reply

www.craigdailypress.com

Craig -- Many Colorado sheriffs are re-evaluating their policy to hold inmates with questionable citizen status past their legal release date after the ACLU sent a letter in April highlighting the illegality of the practice.

Most sheriffs honor requests by the federal agency, Immigration and Customs Enforcement of the Department of Homeland Security, to detain inmates who the agency wants to investigate.

At press time, ICE was not available for comment.

ICE requests up to 48-hour holds on individuals who have been booked and fingerprinted. But the ACLU -- citing magistrate decisions in Oregon, Washington and other counties across the country -- said these requests are not a federal command and, if practiced by law enforcement, are actually unconstitutional.

#17 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-11-21 09:15 PM | Reply

Funny when we see the Libs screaming states' rights, and actually being backed up by the constitution, and the Right screaming FEDERALISM!!!

Fun times we are in! Sociologists would suggest we are in a state of anomie. Anything can happen now and expect crime to blip upwards because of it.

#18 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2017-11-21 09:16 PM | Reply

To me it seems that sanctuary cities fly in the face of that enumerated power.

#16 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Damn... Mr. "10th Amendment" has no self awareness...

#19 | Posted by tonyroma at 2017-11-21 09:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Damn... Mr. "10th Amendment" has no self awareness...

#19 | Posted by tonyroma at 2017-11-21 09:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

He's got You JeffJ in spades.

#20 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-11-21 09:20 PM | Reply

"Actually what it's about is Democrats inviting more illegal immigrants AKA future Dem voters."

Not clear why Republicans can't play that game too... Mackris can you ask Nulli to explain?

#21 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-21 09:21 PM | Reply

Tony,

Federalism is a tiered structure. The Constitution enumerates powers to the federal government. The 10th enumerates all other powers to the states and the people. The 10th does not grant complete autonomy to the states, not even close.

#22 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-11-21 09:21 PM | Reply

"To me it seems that sanctuary cities fly in the face of that enumerated power."

Yes but you think the existence of most Cabinet positions flies in the face of enumerated power. So you're not, like, competent at figuring these kinds of things out. Amazingly, you have demonstrated zero capacity to learn during your tenure here.

#23 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-21 09:23 PM | Reply

JeffJ, erstwhile proponent of small government, here wonders why the states shouldn't be compelled do the Federal government's bidding at their own expense.

But that's nothing, for his next trick he's going to stick a feather in his cap and call it macaroni!

#24 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-21 09:27 PM | Reply

The 10th does not grant complete autonomy to the states, not even close.

Again, if that is what you thought I meant you need to go back and reread the ruling and what et_al wrote.

It's pretty clear to most of us here. The federal government has no right to force the states to violate constitutional rights as enumerated under both the 5th and 10th Amendments along with abrogating the separation of powers by allowing the executive to withhold congressionally-authorized and duly passed funding for said states and municipalities in order to force their cooperation in federal law enforcement's undermanned and underfunded pursuits.

#25 | Posted by tonyroma at 2017-11-21 09:31 PM | Reply

"Federalism is a tiered structure."

Sounds like the opposite of a small structure.

If it were supposed to be small, and never grow larger, what's the need for tiers?

Can you think of things, anything, where the tiered version is smaller than the un-tiered example?

You can have tiered government or small government, but you can't really have both at the same time.

#26 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-21 09:43 PM | Reply

All you have to know is that he is an Obama-appointed judge from San Francisco.
#5 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS

All you have to know is neither you nor Trump know a damn thing about the constitution.

Stick to frivolous lawsuits. It's all you know.

#27 | Posted by ClownShack at 2017-11-21 09:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

It's not about following federal law it's about local communities having to enforce federal laws.

They aren't enforcing federal law, they are being asked to comply with Federal law, et al should know the difference.

Which they do in all sorts of situations, from FBI most wanted list, water regulations, air regulations, the list goes on and on, walk in to any fire station, there are a many Federal laws they are asked to comply with, and do.

The question is why not this law, why can the city pick and choose which Federal laws it wishes to comply with?

JeffJ, erstwhile proponent of small government, here wonders why the states shouldn't be compelled do the Federal government's bidding at their own expense.

It not doing its bidding, you don't seem to understand the Federal Law it is about compliance not enforcement. Regarding the small government comment, sure I am for smaller government but there are federal (national) laws that should be enforced, illegal immigration is one of them, being part of a bigger Union has its benefits, without border enforcement whats the point.

Not clear why Republicans can't play that game too...
#21 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Whats not clear about it? I suppose to a literalist such as yourself, ideas and concepts are hard to grasp.

Republicans see, actually care about citizens and unskilled labor, and minorities. Unlike, as nulli says Democrats are interested in power and votes can get you power. The whole idea of "everything is political" is nothing more than a power grab by Democrats, but I get ahead of your studies. Let me know when you get to basic

Keep working on it.... you'll get there someday Snoofy you seem pretty bright, I know getting a proper education is difficult these days.

Good luck!

#28 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2017-11-21 09:55 PM | Reply

Does the Constitution not enumerate to Congress the power to make immigration policy?

Clearly, but "immigration policy" is not really an issue in the litigation. The implicated immigration statute is 8 U.S.C. § 1373 which deals with communicating with INS.

#29 | Posted by et_al at 2017-11-21 10:05 PM | Reply

"Republicans see, actually care about citizens and unskilled labor, and minorities."

They fetishize it, see (or maybe that's just you), and no, and no.

#30 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-22 12:43 AM | Reply

"They aren't enforcing federal law, they are being asked to comply with Federal law, et al should know the difference.
Which they do in all sorts of situations, from FBI most wanted list, water regulations, air regulations, the list goes on and on, walk in to any fire station, there are a many Federal laws they are asked to comply with, and do."

Welcome to America Comrade.

Unlike your hero Pooty Poot our President has no authority to withhold funds. That is Congress domain. Remember who holds the purse strings? Or did you make it that far in your training? Even Congress would not be able to withhold funds for some vague reason like "cooperation". They would have to be way more specific.

There are also some situations and other laws states do not enforce. Marijuana laws for example.

If Congress wishes to legislate changes in funding to the states they are welcome to. The President does not have that authority. He is not the King.

Good luck with your plan to disrupt and divide and sow chaos in America with your disinformation campaign.

#31 | Posted by donnerboy at 2017-11-22 08:41 AM | Reply

"they are being asked to comply with Federal law"

Maybe Trump should have said "please."

I hear that helps getting people to do stuff you want them to do but can't force them to do.

#32 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-22 01:50 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2017 World Readable

Drudge Retort