The latest in a long line of court decisions ruling against Trump's efforts to pressure sanctuary cities into helping deport undocumented immigrants features an opinion by two conservative Republican judicial appointees.
Prof. Brian Frye of the University of Kentucky Law School interviewed me on this subject, as part of his series of "Ipse Dixit" podcasts.
California has largely prevailed in the lower courts, and the administration's petition focuses on the part of the law with the strongest backing from Supreme Court federalism precedent. It's a case the administration deserves to lose.
"All over the world they're talking about Chicago," Trump said at a law enforcement conference today. "Afghanistan is a safe place by comparison."
In this follow-up to my Washington Post article on the same subject, I consider whether current liberal support for federalism is purely opportunistic, and whether the political left is inherently pro-centralization.
The ruling comes after a long string of losses blocking other administration efforts to deny federal law enforcement funds to sanctuary jurisdictions. The different result in this case is largely a product of the unusual nature of the program involved.
In recent years, many liberals have come to develop a new appreciation for constitutional limits on federal power. Whether the trend continues remains to be seen.
What happens when cities and counties have their own ideas about a law that authorizes the seizure of guns from people who are mentally ill?
They should offer to pay for the transportation of asylum seekers.
Federal judges rule state cannot be forced to assist immigration officials.
The ruling, written by a Republican-appointed judge, is an important victory for federalism.
My newly posted article explains how the administration's efforts have had the unintended effect of strengthening judicial protection for state autonomy.
The administration continues to try to impose grant conditions on state and local governments that were never authorized by by Congress. In two new decision, courts continue to rule against them.
In a case brought by the City of Philadelphia, the court struck down a Justice Department policy conditioning federal law enforcement grants on assisting federal immigration enforcement policy.
The event features Ilya Shapiro of the Cato Institute, and myself.
The suspect's previous DUI arrests didn't even put him on ICE's radar.
The ruling is the latest in a long line of setbacks for the administration's efforts to punish sanctuary jurisdictions by withholding federal law enforcement grants.
The decision is the latest in a long line of legal setbacks for the administration's efforts to force sanctuary cities to help deport undocumented immigrants.
The Trump administration's deportation push finally forced the Golden State to stop criminalizing everything.
The 9th Circuit says pressuring cities to help the feds enforce immigration law is unconstitutional.
The ruling is notable in underscoring how the Supreme Court's sports-betting decision in Murphy v. NCAA helps sanctuary cities.
A rule covering immigration communications between state and federal officials may be unconstitutional.
The ruling is just the start of what may be a prolonged legal battle over immigration and federalism.
The ruling is the latest in long line of defeats for the administration's efforts to cut federal grants to sanctuary jurisdictions. It breaks new ground by showing how the recent Supreme Court ruling in Murphy v. NCAA helps sanctuary cities.
Commentators are right to suggest that Murphy v. NCAA will help sanctuary cities, but wrong to claim it is like to undermine federal laws restricting state taxes.
The Supreme Court's invalidation of a federal law preventing state legalization of sports gambling strengthens protection for state autonomy from the federal government.
The US Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit affirms a district court ruling against the administration's efforts to deny federal grants to sanctuary jurisdictions.
The various lawsuits pitting the Trump administration against sanctuary jurisdictions has important implications for constitutional federalism that go beyond immigration policy.
A California mayor issued a public warning of an ICE raid earning the administration's wrath
Immigration, federalism, and the 10th Amendment
The Justice Department wants to block three laws that it says hamper immigration enforcement.
Motel 6 sued for passing names along to ICE.
The #NeverTrump favorite, poised to be a Senate thorn in the president's side, has more in common with Trump's jail-'em-all ICE director than many Republicans care to admit
He's more than happy to engage in power grabs when it helps his agenda.
Why the Trump administration lost in federal court.
The data don't match the attorney general's attacks on sanctuary cities.
The bill offers many, many exemptions.
State cannot force local police to serve as immigration agents and detain people for the feds.
Federalism is alive and kicking in the age of Trump.
Should we credit the crackdown on immigration enforcement?
Again left urban leadership embraces federalism, but for the purpose of protecting funds for police militarization.
Hundreds of millions in crime and court funding at stake
Rep. Justin Amash breaks from party and rejects both bills, citing constitutional violations.
Missouri's governor has called a special session to try to override the ordinance. Here's what libertarians need to know.
In an unprecedented move, it wants them to assist in border patrol.
Senators drafting massive combination bill with "Kate's Law" and "Back the Blue" mandatory minimum sentences that are expensive, unneeded.
Help Reason push back with more of the fact-based reporting we do best. Your support means more reporters, more investigations, and more coverage.
Make a donation today! No thanks
Every dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.
Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interested
So much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.
I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanks
Push back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.
My donation today will help Reason push back! Not today
Back journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.
Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Back independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Your support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Donate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks