narrative essay my wedding day https://plastic-pollution.org/trialrx/can-clomid-cause-ovarian-cysts/31/ get link lexapro comes in what mg tablets hvornr skal viagra tages https://willherndon.org/pharmaceutical/cialis-se-puede-partir/24/ enter site alternative certification resume example catheter prothesis bags homework help co uk gcse additional applied science coursework sample of validation letter for thesis ranidil 150 mg viagra https://vabf.org/reading/video-homework-helper/250/ grand canyon university homework help https://campuschildcare-old.wm.edu/thinking/essay-topics-for-finance-students/10/ tips for easy speech writing avodart usa enter site examples scope delimitation thesis short essay on war and peace go stem cell research essay intro https://tffa.org/businessplan/tips-to-write-good-essay/70/ the king of eastern viagra source link cialis 300 mg 30 tablet pc online check writing service source solve for y problems viagra color vision business plan word doc The long-fought battle in the ongoing sanctuary war, took another legal twist on Wednesday when a federal appeals court overturned a lower court ruling, that initially stopped the Trump Administration’s attempt to withhold grant money to sanctuary cities, violating existing federal immigration laws.
Wednesday’s ruling by the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York overturned the previous 2017 lower court ruling that denied grant money from the “Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program,” which doles out over $250 million dollars annually to New York State, regardless of immigration violations.
A Department of Justice spokesperson acknowledged the court ruling in a prepared statement.
“Today’s decision rightfully recognizes the lawful authority of the Attorney General to ensure that the Department of Justice grant recipients is not at the same time thwarting federal law enforcement priorities. The grant conditions here require states and cities that receive DOJ grants to share information about criminals in custody. The federal government uses this information to enforce national immigration laws–policies supported by successive Democrat and Republican administrations.”
Adding, “All Americans will benefit from increased public safety as this Administration is able to implement its lawful immigration and public safety policies.”
The ongoing immigration battle from the moment the President took office against progressive cites and states that created illegal sanctuary laws, as a guise to obstruct federal immigration laws has resulted in chaos and mayhem for its citizens, within those enclaves.
Back in 2017 New York City and State along with Washington, Massachusetts, and Connecticut sued the federal government, and the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York backed them, ordering that the grant money be released, stopping the Trump Administration from putting immigration-related conditions on grants.
However, this latest ruling by the appeals court stating it “cannot agree that the federal government must be enjoined from imposing the challenging conditions on the federal grants here at issue.”
Adding, “These conditions help the federal government enforce national immigration laws and policies supported by successive Democratic and Republican administrations,” the court ruled. “But more to the authorization point, they ensure that applicants satisfy particular statutory grant requirements imposed by Congress and subject to Attorney General oversight.”
The appeals court also shot-down the lower courts’ contention that the administration is intruding on powers specifically reserved to the states, noting that the Supreme Court had already ruled that the federal government maintains “broad” and “preeminent” power.
Wednesday’s ruling is an important win for the administration’s efforts in cracking down on illegal criminal aliens and “sanctuary” policies that endangers its citizens and limits local law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration policies that identify criminal aliens for deportation.
However progressive like New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio has stated that he will use the courts to once again fight President Trump’s immigration policies, which suggests that this fight is far from being over.
This next immigration battle will no doubt be fought all the way to the Supreme Court, however, there’s also something brewing legislatively, that is getting attention.
Two enterprising Republican lawmakers from the great state of North Carolina, notably Senator Thom Tillis and Rep. Ted Budd have co-sponsored legislation in Congress that would first, reimburse jurisdictions that comply with ICE detainers, and protect sheriffs against wrongful detention claims made by third parties.
Secondly, allows victims of illegal criminal aliens released by sanctuary cities, the right to sue those cities for damages.
In a recent press release Congressmen, Ted Budd outlined the core principles of their legislation, “It is clear that sanctuary cities’ failure to cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement has had a real cost on society, both economically and in terms of human lives. That’s why in July, my colleagues and I introduced the Justice for Victims of Sanctuary Cities Act which allows families and victims of sanctuary city policies to sue the city for failing to comply with detainer requests from ICE. Now, my colleagues and I are introducing legislation that goes further and incentives local law enforcement to comply with federal detainer requests. The Immigration Detainer Enforcement Act does just that.”
Budd continued, “This bill, along with the Justice for Victims of Sanctuary Cities Act, lays out a clear incentive-based approach that takes all the excuses away from sanctuary cities and would make it an easy decision to cooperate with federal law enforcement. This is a common-sense proposal that will protect our communities and help save American lives.”