Donnie Trump blocked from denying federal funds for sanctuary cities

[Miles]

Poor Donnie can't catch a break.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/25/politics/sanctuary-cities-injunction/index.html

 

[BotanyBoy]

Oh look, lefty globalist judge goes activist and helps team (D) violate federal laws and undermine national sovereignty.

I'm sure Democrats are extra proud.

 

[Miles]

Oh look, lefty globalist judge goes activist and helps team (D) violate federal laws and undermine national sovereignty.

I'm sure Democrats are extra proud.

OOoh, so dramatic! BE AFRAID!! Maybe it's that or it's unconstitutional to try and bully cities into doing whatever Donnie wants? Just because little snowflakes like yourself want things your way, doesn't mean its constitutional. Laws are so frustrating sometimes amirite?

 

[Hard_Rom]

Oh look, lefty globalist judge goes activist and helps team (D) violate federal laws and undermine national sovereignty.

I'm sure Democrats are extra proud.

Get off the cross! We need the wood!

 

[BotanyBoy]

Maybe it's that or it's unconstitutional to try and bully cities into doing whatever Donnie wants?

Immigration laws are not whatever Donnie wants, they are what Donnie is sworn to uphold and execute faithfully.

Just because little snowflakes like yourself want things your way, doesn't mean its constitutional.

It's not my way, it's federal law.

And no it doesn't, but the federal supremacy clause in the U.S. Constitution does.

Laws are so frustrating sometimes amirite?

Said the person who is supporting defiance of the laws, LOL

Get off the cross! We need the wood!

Hold on a min you're about to have a major surplus!!!...about 20%..LMFAO!!!

Typical socialist, can't even go cut down his own lumber.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Oh look, lefty globalist judge goes activist and helps team (D) violate federal laws and undermine national sovereignty.

Since when are the biggummint's federal laws important to you? And nobody with your attitude towards government has any business caring about "national sovereignty."

 

[BotanyBoy]

Since when are the biggummint's federal laws important to you?

The the federal laws being discussed are some of the basic, core, primary roles of a government.

And nobody with your attitude towards government has any business caring about "national sovereignty."

Why not?

I'm a liberal, not an anarchist.

 

[Conager]

Since when are the biggummint's federal laws important to you? And nobody with your attitude towards government has any business caring about "national sovereignty."

Since when are the State's rights important to you? And <sic> nobody with your attitude towards unbridled Federal power has any business caring about "State's sovereignty."

These Judge's masturbatory fantasies that they can set national spending policies aside, I'd love it if Scalia's replacement would affirm such limits on Federal coersion. It won't happen.

If so, all your pet ideas are out the window. Gun control act of 1968, Roe v Wade as national policy, Obamacare.

You liberals love judicial legislation until your ox is gored. It hardly ever happens because lawyers are 98.7% liberal, but when it does you howl. Citizens United? Heller?

Heller is definately the whirlwind you liberals reaped by missaplication of the incorporation doctrine.

If this stands, next Democrat President can be muzzled completely by any Texas Judge.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Immigration laws are not whatever Donnie wants, they are what Donnie is sworn to uphold and execute faithfully.

That duty does not imply a duty to defund sanctuary cities.

 

[KingOrfeo]

I'm a liberal . . .

No, you're not.

. .. not an anarchist.

You are far, far nearer to being an anarchist than Sanders or Warren to being a Communist.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Since when are the State's rights important to you?

They're not. The immigrants are.

 

[BotanyBoy]

That duty does not imply a duty to defund sanctuary cities.

If that's what it takes to enforce federal laws it does.

Just like they quit funding our po-po when we gave them the finger on weed.

Comply, or pay the price, that's how laws work.

Did you not understand that?

No, you're not.

How do you figure?

You are far, far nearer to being an anarchist than Sanders or Warren to being a Communist.

Um.....No, not even close.

I'm just not in support of a totalitarian government that takes everything from everyone and controls them down to their very thoughts, so I seem like an anarchist to you. But I'm not anything of the sort.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

More likely he and his legal team, i.e. Miller & Bannon, are just stupid and incompetent and don't know how to write an executive order that can get approval from the United States of America.

Legal writs are a BIT more complicated than Breitbart trash.

Oh look, lefty globalist judge goes activist and helps team (D) violate federal laws and undermine national sovereignty.

I'm sure Democrats are extra proud.

 

[Conager]

That duty does not imply a duty to defund sanctuary cities.

Of course it does. Every dime they get for COOPERATION with the feds is, by law contingent upon them actually COOPERATING with the feds. Just because no one bothered to insist before doesn't mean he cannot and according go his oath should.

You would not make such a ridicous argument if local education boards went to court demanding to be given the money for federal mandates while refusing to comply with the mandates.

 

[BotanyBoy]

More likely he and his legal team, i.e. Miller & Bannon, are just stupid and incompetent and don't know how to write an executive order that can get approval from the United States of America.

Legal writs are a BIT more complicated than Breitbart trash.

An activist judge is not disapproval from the USA.

 

[Conager]

More likely he and his legal team, i.e. Miller & Bannon, are just stupid and incompetent and don't know how to write an executive order that can get approval from the United States of America.

Legal writs are a BIT more complicated than Breitbart trash.

What do you know about "legal writs" Betty Poop? Are you, like Oreo a lawyer on the internet?

...or, are you, like he, simply an aggregator of what you read on Salon and Slate?

 

[Conager]

They're not. The immigrants are.

Oh, really? I live among them, work with and assist them nearly every day. What have you done for a "immigrant" today? What about last week? Last year? Ever?

By the way, I've never met a legal or illegal immigrant worth living amongst and working with that would take issue with deporting criminals.

 

[Libsam]

It's also interesting that these jurisdictions are so reliant on illegal federal funds that they would suffer irreparable harm if taken away. So, the rest of the country has to pay for them breaking the law to make their state great. Go Equality!!!

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Well, take your pick.

Blah blah blah ACTIVIST JUDGES blah blah blah GLOBALISTS blah blah blah LEFTIES blah blah blah

or

Dumb fucks don't know how to write executive orders.

Hmmmm . . . .

An activist judge is not disapproval from the USA.

 

[Saint Peter]

Oh, really? I live among them, work with and assist them nearly every day. What have you done for a "immigrant" today? What about last week? Last year? Ever?

I carry on their bloodline.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Of course it does. Every dime they get for COOPERATION with the feds is, by law contingent upon them actually COOPERATING with the feds.

Only in limited and specific ways. E.g., in the 1970s the feds made state highway funding contingent on a state's enactment of the 55mph speed limit, but those funds could not have been withheld on the grounds that a state was failing to comply with the Voting Rights Act or something. If Congress has voted funds to San Francisco for this or that purpose, failure to assist in federal enforcement of immigration law is no grounds to stop those funds unless that condition is clearly spelled out in the grant.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Well, take your pick.

Blah blah blah ACTIVIST JUDGES blah blah blah GLOBALISTS blah blah blah LEFTIES blah blah blah

or

Dumb fucks don't know how to write executive orders.

Hmmmm . . . .

Oh look you can't read either, shocking

And I don't have to pick as it's not an either/or situation.

It's deff an activist, lefty, globalist judge.......but could be both.

 

[Conager]

I carry on their bloodline.

Well, technically, I don't think any humans evolved on the continent.

He means "Mexicans" (and only illegal ones) he just won't say it. It isn't even brown skinned people because he has no use for Cubans especially if they vote Republican.

 

[Conager]

Only in limited and specific ways. E.g., in the 1970s the feds made state highway funding contingent on a state's enactment of the 55mph speed limit, but those funds could not have been withheld on the grounds that a state was failing to comply with the Voting Rights Act or something. If Congress has voted funds to San Francisco for this or that purpose, failure to assist in federal enforcement of immigration law is no grounds to stop those funds unless that condition is clearly spelled out in the grant.

It is.

Uncle Sugar writes no legislation passing out carrots that has no sticks.

Regardless, Uncle Sugar can arbitrarily and capreciously dole out bridges to nowhere as it sees fit. It doesn't have to give tge redheaded step-child a piece of licorice if it chooses not to.

Uncle Sugar could close every Military Base in Florida tommorrow if it wanted. It could shift every procurement contract out of tge State of California as well.

 

[Saint Peter]

Well, technically, I don't think any humans evolved on the continent.

Evolution ended when your great great grand pappy stopped doodling on the cave walls?