Q&A of the Day – How to Hold Sanctuary States & Cities Accountable
Each day I feature a listener question sent by one of these methods.
Email: brianmudd@iheartmedia.com
Social: @brianmuddradio
iHeartRadio: Use the Talkback feature – the microphone button on our station’s page in the iHeart app.
Today’s Entry: @brianmuddradio Hey Brian, so let me get this straight. Sanctuary States/cities have authority over ICE (which is a federal agency) and in the southern border States, the border patrol (a federal agency) has authority over States/governors?
Bottom Line: While I detect a bit of sarcasm in your note, what you’re illustrating in terms of the absurdities associated with the illegal immigration crisis is actually an instructive point in more ways than you may have even considered. As we’ve discussed recently there are no shortage of sanctuary states (11) and local sanctuary jurisdictions (567) in total. These states and cities not only continue to ignore federal immigration laws, but they’re also continuing to do so at a time in which, to your point, states like Texas and Florida have been met with resistance as they’re trying to protect their citizens and their interests, from the lawlessness of the federal government’s refusal to properly enforce federal immigration laws. A reality which just led to the impeachment of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas this week. While these two dynamics of the illegal immigration crisis seem at odds – they're directly connected. And that’s due to what President Trump successfully fought for during his time as president.
You might recall that one of the earliest legal battles of the Trump administration ensued from President Trump’s executive order withholding federal funds from sanctuary states and cities. The executive order signed January 25th, of 2017 – just five days into his presidency, stated: Sanctuary jurisdictions across the United States willfully violate Federal law in an attempt to shield aliens from removal from the United States. These jurisdictions have caused immeasurable harm to the American people and to the very fabric of our Republic. The executive order then tasked federal agencies with withholding federal funds from sanctuary jurisdictions. Predictably the order set off a media firestorm and was met with immediate backlash from sanctuary jurisdictions that would be impacted with lawsuits attempting to prevent the order from taking effect that followed.
Given the slow wheels of the justice system in this country, unless it’s to attempt to criminally convict Donald Trump prior an election, there wasn’t a legal resolution to Trump’s order under February 26th, 2020 – over three years from the date the order was issued. It was on that date that the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled in favor of the Trump administration opening the door for the federal government to begin withholding funds from federal jurisdictions. But you might have picked up on something with the timing of that decision. February 26th, of 2020 was just days before all the government’s focus shifted to the pandemic. That's why you likely didn’t know that the federal government won on the issue of taking enforcement actions against sanctuary jurisdictions and it’s also why the Trump administration didn’t immediately follow through with the withholding of funds.
I mention that for two reasons, first, that there is legal consistency – with the federal government able to administer punitive actions against sanctuary governments in addition to having authority over border policy as the United States Supreme Court recently ruled in the Biden administration's lawsuit against Texas. But also, because it’s not just President Biden’s open border policies that are making this country less safe. His administration's allowance for lawlessness in sanctuary jurisdictions also makes the country less safe. Like virtually all other Trump issued executive orders President Biden revoked the order to withhold federal funds from sanctuary jurisdictions. At any time, he could reinstate the order which would no doubt have a profound effect within these communities. It would likely lead to fewer sanctuary jurisdictions and may even have the effect of eliminating them. It’s a daily choice not to for President Biden. Just as it’s a daily choice to keep the southern border open.
More instructively, should Donald Trump be reelected president this year, it’s a tool he could immediately use upon becoming president. In addition to securing the southern border, and finishing the construction of the border wall, he’s already promised the largest mass deportation event in US history should he become president again. Trump might have less resistance in that effort than many suspect because it is within his legal right to withhold federal funds from sanctuary jurisdictions. So, it’s not the law or the legal system that’s inconsistent with this issue. It all comes down to the will of the President of the United States to uphold the rule of law pertaining to illegal immigration in this country.