- Joined
- Nov 28, 2011
- Messages
- 23,085
- Reaction score
- 17,983
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Other
Errr... yeah... the section you're quoting pretty much supports my assertion. Unless you think he was making a joke to entertain the people in the audience.Your article says Pena stated: You shouldn't hunt headlines, they always come back to bite you. Browns response was nothing more than a response to what Pena stated here in Sacramento.
California and Brown have been quite aggressive in terms of the "Sanctuary State" process. The state has barred state and municipal law enforcement from aiding federal immigration efforts, including asking those in custody of their immigration status. It bars schools, libraries, courthouses and other "safe zones" to follow the same policies. (ICE can show up there, but won't get any aid from those facilities). The state even provides driver's licenses for undocumented immigrants. Sure sounds welcoming to me.
...yes, I was pretty clear that a governor making an open statement of "welcome" to undocumented immigrants has no legal force, nor can a state violate federal law.And yet states and locals are required to transmit the required information as requested by Federal Law, no matter their claim of sanctuary or not.
Can Trump cut off funds for sanctuary cities? The Constitution says yes. - LA Times
The extent of required cooperation required by law is fairly limited, and attempts to require more cooperation could get shot down as violations of federalism. E.g. attempts to pressure "sanctuary" states and cities are already facing court challenges; and I'm pretty sure that any federal law that tries to turn state and local law enforcement into de facto ICE agents would violate the Constitution.