The tactic preferred by obstinate mayors of sanctuary cities seems clear – many insist they’re going to continue to violate the law once Donald Trump becomes president and dare him and the federal government to make good on their threats of defunding them.
They might want to rethink their insistence on breaking the law as there are some very serious criminal offenses, felonies, that could also be part of a sanctuary city prosecution. Sanctuary cities are those that refuse to cooperate with ICE, including the refusal to honor their detainers for an additional 48 hour hold beyond a detainee’s release date to allow ICE agents the time necessary to pick up the offender.
Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti warned that withholding federal funds from sanctuary cities would cause “social, economic and security problems,” and that the entire state of California could face potential bankruptcy. Of course, if those withholding occur as a result of their refusal to comply with federal immigration law, it is those directing the lawlessness, the mayors and other officials who bear the responsibility.
In August the Department of Justice’s Inspector General (IG) issued a memorandum which stated that federal laws were being violated by sanctuary cities. That determination provides a sufficient basis for the new Attorney General, likely to be Senator Jeff Sessions, to strip sanctuary cities of select federal law enforcement grants and other financial awards from any government entities determined to be in violation. Major cities, such as New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Washington, D.C. are among those which will be affected.
While the Democrat mayors have asserted that they are above federal law in refusing to comply, they now do so at the risk of personal prosecution for their own lawbreaking as well as potentially being charged as a criminal accessory. They also stand to lose a minimum of 25 percent and often more of their federal funding.
While the bloc grant method of distribution impacts some of the enforcement methods available, in four Democrat-controlled “Sanctuary States,” Connecticut, New Mexico, Colorado and California, the withholding of funds to the entire state is appropriate, as they are Sanctuary States throughout. California is the top recipient in the nation, with 37 percent of the total $252.5 billion or $93.6 billion operating expenses were provided by the federal government. It’s an amount that Breitbart listed at $6,451 per person, man, woman and child, in the state.
It is widely recognized that California, with its socialist policies and heavy taxation is in a precarious situation financially. It is questionable as to whether or not they would be able to survive a financial calamity. An interruption of funding for failure to cooperate with federal mandates could easily bankrupt the state and many local government entities.
For some reason, Garcetti, de Blasio and Emanuel like to talk like the big man standing up to the federal government in defense of illegal alien criminals. When services stop being provided and layoffs start those strong positions will weaken fairly quickly. If they start facing criminal charges, things will change even faster. None of these “brave public servants” wants to join those they are illegally protecting behind bars.
Powered by 247 News