I'm fine with most of it. There is precedence for States rights...there isnt precedence for city/towns rights. And I would be willing to bet that at some point the Judge and Sheriff in question swore an oath of allegiance to uphold the laws of the land...not just the laws they like. And if they have the right to avoid following the laws of the land by choice and without consequence...shouldnt that same right apply to all citizens in their jurisdiction?
I think you would definitely determine who was really concerned about the cost, and who is using cost as an excuse because they dont like the politics.
Sure, if that's what they did. However, most illegal immigrants get taxes taken out of their pay by their employers. Most have stolen or fraudulent SSAN's that they give the employer for tax purposes. Most companies cannot get away with paying cash under the table. Most businesses don't deal in cash, and their bank accounts are audited by any one or more of numerous government or private entities each year, such as annual payroll audits for their liability insurance, workers comp insurance, audits of payroll taxes for FUTA, SUTA, FICA, etc.
If the employer paid to get them here and the illegal alien has only worked for that one employer, then I agree, they should be liable for the costs of deportation, including all the costs associated with deportation hearings and so forth. However, if the employer is just one of many employers that could have or would have employed a particular illegal alien then requiring a single employer (the one that got caught) to pay those costs alone would be an infringement of the employers Constitutional protections under the Equal Protection Clause and Due Process Clause.