The anti-commandeering principle serves causes favored by both the right and the left.
Video of Federalist Society Executive Branch Review Panel on "State Sovereignty or Fair-Weather Federalism?"
Participants include Prof. Edward Rubin (Vanderbilt), Prof. Carolyn Shapiro (Chicago-Kent), Ilya Shapiro (Cato Institute), and myself.
Conservative state legislators are taking a page from the playbook of pro-immigration activists and the marijuana legalization movement.
Biden Stimulus Bill Provision Targeting State Tax Cuts Might be Struck Down by Courts for Same Reasons as Trump Efforts to Pull Federal Grants From Sanctuary Cities
In both situations, the grant conditions in question were not clearly and unambiguously authorized by Congress.
Conservative Judges Chose Legal Principles Over Partisanship and Trump—But We Shouldn't Take that for Granted
Conservative judges have stymied Trump in his election challenges - and many other cases where his positions went against their legal principles. But a populist/nationalist GOP could gradually change the nature of conservative jurisprudence.
The much-publicized result is ocnsistent with previous studies on the impact of sanctuary city
For the moment, the executive "memorandum" is long on rhetoric, but short on actual action. If it ever does lead to action, it could be yet another attack on federalism and separation of powers.
Adam Thierer, author of the lead essay, has a response to his critics.
Thanks to him, there will be no escaping accusations by the left that states' rights are merely a ruse to protect white power.
The ruling is at odds with decisions by four other circuits and could be headed to the Supreme Court - unless Biden wins the election and reverses administration policy.
The ruling is yet another setback for the administration, though legal battles over sanctuary jurisdictions will continue.
The latest in a long series of setbacks to the adminstration's efforts to pressure sanctuary jurisdictions by attaching conditions to federal grants.
The ruling is in line with numerous other court decisions on the same subject, but conflicts with an anomalous recent ruling by the Second Circuit.
Apparently, conservatives believe in states' rights, except when they don't.
Trump Wins Second Circuit Case Against Sanctuary Cities, in Ruling that Goes Against Broad Consensus of other Court Decisions
The decision allows the Justice Department to impose immigration enforcement conditions on federal grants to state governments, and goes against numerous other court decisions striking down the exact same policy.
The new lawsuits against the state of New Jersey and King County, Washington have many of the same constitutional flaws as the administration's other efforts to to target sanctuary cities.
Rural communities continue to resist their legislatures’ attempts to enact gun control by declaring themselves “Second Amendment sanctuaries.”
I took part in panels on these topics at the recent Federalist Society National Lawyers Convention
The constitutional showdown over federalism and immigration approaches SCOTUS.
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.
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.
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.
Federal Appellate Court Rules Against Trump Administration on Most Issues in California "Sanctuary State" Case
The ruling, written by a Republican-appointed judge, is an important victory for federalism.
'Making Federalism Great Again'—My Forthcoming Texas Law Review Article on the Litigation Generated by Trump's Assault on Sanctuary Cities
My newly posted article explains how the administration's efforts have had the unintended effect of strengthening judicial protection for state autonomy.
Trump Administration Continues to Lose Sanctuary City Cases—this Time Respecting New Fiscal Year 2018 Grant Conditions Imposed on State and Local Government Receiving Federal Law Enforcement Grants
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.
Trump Administration Loses Yet Another Sanctuary City Case—this Time in the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
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.
Federal Court Rules Against Trump in Sanctuary Cities Case Brought by Seven States and New York City
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 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.
Federal Court Rules Against Trump Administration on Most Issues in California "Sanctuary State" Case
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.