The Fed is getting ready to throw down on sanctuary cities

Department of Homeland Security requests federal prosecutors to lodge criminal charges against sanctuary cities for violating Federal law on deportation

California passed a state law defining itself as a “sanctuary state.”  This law went into effect on January 1 of this year.  However, this is defiant act against U.S. Federal law governing the treatment of illegal immigrants into the United States of America, of which California is still part.

The Trump Administration is not taking this lying down.

On January 16th, DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen confirmed that her department asked Federal prosecutors to see if they can criminally charge sanctuary cities for their refusal to follow federal immigration laws.

The California law acts to severely restrict the cooperation that state and local law enforcement is allowed to offer the federal government in executing immigration and deportation laws.

Kierstjen Nielsen, Secretary of the US Department of Homeland Security

While the US Constitution is arranged to severely restrict the powers of the Federal government, giving the bulk of authority of law to the States or the people of the United States of America (Amendment X), the matter of immigration is a matter that even recently has been held to be in the purview of the Federal government of the United States of America.

As Justice Kennedy wrote in the 2012 decision in Arizona v. United States:

The Government of the Unit­ed States has broad, undoubted power over the subject of immi­gration and the status of aliens. … This authority rests, in part, on the National Government’s con­stitutional power to “establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization,” U. S. Const., Art. I, §8, cl. 4, and its inherent power as sovereign to control and conduct relations with foreign nations….

The really amusing piece of this decision is that it came down from the Supreme Court in response to the Arizona law that increased that state’s authority to prosecute illegal aliens in the state.  So here, for many people that supported increased adherence to immigration and deportation statutes, this decision amounted to a disappointment for Arizonans who wanted very strict border control.  The Federal government’s authority supersedes the state’s own authority, the decision says, and so the state cannot do what it wants on a matter that the Federal Government is tasked to manage.

The fact that for decades, the Feds have conveniently weakened their execution of the law is not the point.  But now, that enforcement is strengthening, and a new state, California, is trying to buck the Feds the other way.

Yet this Supreme Court decision stands and it clearly gives the Federal government the upper hand in this matter.

The presence of Deep State, Obama-appointed operatives in various offices in government may be a monkeywrench thrown in these works.  However, it appears that the Secretary of DHS is absolutely on the right track.

Help us grow. Support The Duran on Patreon!


The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Duran.

What do you think?

Notify of
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Rodney Atkinson
Rodney Atkinson
January 17, 2018

About bloody time. It looked like the USA was breaking up into waring states.

Dennis Morrisseau
January 17, 2018


john vieira
john vieira
January 18, 2018

The UN has come out openly confirming that their agenda IS to reduce ALL countries to the “lowest common denominator” via unrestricted migration….something Obama ( despite his and Bill’s earlier ‘mouthings’) was well into implementing for the USA…and his ‘protege’, the “loser” had indicated she was going to open the ‘flood gates’….Sanctuary cities are a ‘crock’ spearheaded by the ‘crooked’…and should be abolished completely…anon!!!

Scott Robinson
Scott Robinson
January 19, 2018

One presumes that US law has been contravened by people crossing an international border at an “unofficial” port of entry (eg: somewhere on the Rio Grande), without producing passports/visas. This would make such people wanted suspects in the commission of crimes. It beggars belief as to how sanctuary states/cities can be allowed to persist – they are aiding and abetting suspects. Maybe I just don’t understand the workings of that large country in the western hemisphere.

The Fed is getting ready to throw down on sanctuary cities

George Soros recommits himself to destroying nationalism