The existence of sanctuary cities for illegal alien invaders all across the republic provide “safe haven” against deportation for those who cross the border illegally. Officials in these “sanctuaries” claim that turning illegal alien invaders over to federal authorities that intend to deport these law breakers would “rend the social fabric and impede policing.” However, these officials fail to provide examples of the disaster that would occur should the cities follow their State Constitutions. While the federal government holds exclusive authority over rules for naturalization, States hold concurrent authority over enforcement of immigration law. To understand concurrent and exclusive jurisdiction under the Constitution, please see this lesson at Publius Huldah’s blog. So, when States allow cities to provide impunity for those who break federal law where concurrent jurisdiction exists, States are failing in their duty to protect citizens as well.
With the election of Donald Trump as the 45th president, sanctuary city mayors have doubled down on resisting in deportation of illegal alien invaders should their law enforcement officers engage in lawful contact with these lawbreakers.
Municipalities that protect undocumented immigrants from deportation stand to lose billions in federal aid if President-elect Donald Trump fulfills promises to starve them financially.
More than 200 U.S. ‘sanctuary cities’ won’t turn over people to federal officers seeking to deport them nor share information about them, saying that would rend the social fabric and impede policing. Since Trump’s election last week, mayors including San Francisco’s Ed Lee, New York’s Bill de Blasio and Chicago’s Rahm Emanuel have vowed not to back down.
“This city and so many cities around the country will do all we can to protect our residents and to make sure that families are not torn apart,” de Blasio said Wednesday after meeting with Trump at Trump Tower.
What these mayors fail to realize is these individuals have broken the law, just as those who rape, murder and steal. Yet, illegal alien invaders are “protected” while other lawbreakers are not. How is this protecting residents and families when some illegal alien invaders commit additional crimes beside violating immigration law? And, how is it the sanctuary cities in the States have not been called out by governors for not adhering to the State Constitutions? Policy is not law and these officials in “sanctuary cities,” be it mayor, police chief, law enforcement officers, clerks, etc., that violate the State Constitution are criminals themselves.
States are prohibited from making law in violation of federal law when the Constitution authorizes exclusive authority in that area to Congress — the uniform rule of naturalization is exclusive to Congress. States retain coequal authority and jurisdiction to protect the citizens from invasion. Since the current administration refuses to protect the States from invasion, the States have authority and jurisdiction to do it themselves. However, States are failing in their authority to protect citizens by allowing sanctuary cities to exist.
Another question that could be asked about Congress and the exclusive authority over uniform rules of naturalization concerns the uniform rules of immigration. If Congress has the exclusive authority over establishing uniform rules of naturalization, does Congress by that authority have exclusive authority over uniform rules of immigration? According to Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution, “The migration or importation of such persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight, …..” And, in Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution, final clause, it states, “To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution of the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the united States, or in any department or officer, thereof.” In these two tenets, one can see that to make uniform rules of naturalization, the Congress would need to make rules for immigration, which would be the first step toward naturalization for those entering the nation. However, those entering in violation of immigration laws are considered invaders, which the States hold concurrent jurisdiction to thwart.
Many mayors in these cities have justified “protecting” illegal alien invaders due to a dwindling metropolitan population and labor shortages that are filled by immigrants, legal as well as illegal alien invaders. However, dwindling populations and labor shortages can be attributed to poor city policies, laws, and government sanctioned relocation of manufacturing and production facilities belonging to large corporations to other nations. Should Trump make good on his vow to starve these sanctuary cities financially, cities and states will lose approximately $650 billion in federal funds for “everything from police to sidewalks as they confront pension obligations and shrinking budgets.”
At what point does the economic benefit of protecting illegal alien invaders clash with losing federal funding and risking the safety of citizens? This is what mayors of sanctuary cities will need to weigh to justify to continually violate the law. However, from the information that Bloomberg gathered from several prominent sanctuary cities, mayors have no intention of assisting the federal government in deportation or apprehending of illegal alien invaders.
In all reality, “We the People” and the States created the federal government as established by the Constitution for the united States of America. Enumerated, defined and limited powers are authorized by the Constitution to the federal government, while the States retain unlimited powers. It is the federal government that should receive the money to operate from the States if it suffers a shortfall from the areas identified in the Constitution the federal government attains its operating capital. As it stands right now, the States are beholden to the federal government and subject to coercion and bribery to follow the instructions of the federal government.
Under the lawless, criminal Obama administration, sanctuary cities were condoned and immigration law became just a suggestion. The pen and the phone became the “illegal legislation” for many constitutional laws in the republic while a complicit Congress twiddled their thumbs. This same administration released hundreds of thousands of criminal illegal alien invaders into communities across the republic instead of deporting them — these were murderers, rapists, thieves, and assailants.
The time for lawlessness is over. It is time to return to lawfulness.
To the residents of these cities and citizens across the nation who will be adversely effected by these obstinate officials:
How many millions of American citizens are out of work right now? Government numbers regarding the unemployment rate are calculated to obscure the true number of unemployed individuals. The need for illegal alien invaders to “work” is another smoke and mirror tactic being used by these charlatan local politicians and officials to increase their voting base among families who have illegal alien invader members in their household.
These charlatan politicians are willing to risk the safety of the citizen residents by harboring criminals — illegal alien invaders who violated immigration law by entering illegally and those who committed additional crimes once entering illegally. Moreover, these illegal alien invaders tend to support “policies” in line with the nations from which they exited to enter the US illegally. Are citizens really supportive of “laws and policies” based on whims, corruption, criminality and lawlessness? For citizens residing in sanctuary cities, the answer has to be a resounding “yes” or these officials would not be allowed to retain their office. As such, State citizen residents are supportive of this as well since no resounding opposition to these sanctuary cities are reverberating through the halls of state capitol buildings.
While the federal government cannot force States to enforce federal law (immigration law in this case), citizens can demand their States protect them from invasion of those in violation of the law, perpetuating a state of invasion when untold numbers of aliens are invading this nation daily.
As it stands, State nor local officials condoning and operating sanctuary cities are serving the best interest of the citizens. Instead, these charlatan politicians are serving their own best interest and the interest of a sect of the citizen population who may have illegal alien family members. Basically, it is all about the voting base, as some cities allow illegal alien invaders to vote, a privilege bestowed upon citizens that legal immigrants had to earn through naturalization. It is a bastardization of a privilege many fought and died to preserve — the process of free election. An intentional manipulation of the voter base by a few constitutes a subtle subversive revolution to shift power from the people toward a select political few.
As the deck becomes stacked toward metropolitan areas selecting the president and vice-president through promotion of the national popular vote (unconstitutional as it is), these “sanctuary cities” will become the bastion upon which election outcomes will be based, thereby negating the rest of the population that does not reside in metropolitan areas. It is a scenario these mayors and governors have calculated to shift power to the minority using whatever means necessary. It is a vision the framers possibly foresaw when establishing an electoral college for the election of the president and vice-president by the States — a measure to keep the federal government beholden to the States.
If the federal government withholds funds from the States harboring sanctuary cities, it is a tactic the feds can use to coerce State compliance. However, money being sent to the States from the federal government is unconstitutional from the start. But, States lost their sovereignty over the federal government in the “War to Enslave the States” and lost their fiduciary control with the ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment. So, the States and these cities, at this point, need to comply or face the consequences of losing money. Being the States hold concurrent jurisdiction in repelling invasion, the States are in violation of their constitutional duty to the people by allowing sanctuary cities to operate.