Fifth Circuit Court Sides With Trump and Texas On Sanctuary Cities - Granite Grok

Fifth Circuit Court Sides With Trump and Texas On Sanctuary Cities

sanctuarycitiesThere are not a lot of things the Federal Government should be doing but border enforcement and National Security are one of them (or is that two of them?).

But progressives are loathe to part with their illegal voter base even when it comes with violence, human trafficking, gangs, murder, and mayhem. And if we are being honest they are okay with all of that too because it facilitates their agenda: chaos and disorder invite heavy-handed rule by the political class, and they are all that and a bag of low salt Fair-Trade Kale Chips.

So this appeals court ruling must really piss them off.

Grok Banner Donate Today

States have the power to punish sanctuary cities within their borders and to force local police and sheriff’s departments to cooperate in turning over illegal immigrants to the federal government for deportation, an appeals court ruled Tuesday in upholding a Texas law.

The 3-0 decision by a panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals marks a major victory for President Trump, who has demanded punishment for sanctuary cities that thwart the federal government to protect illegal immigrants.

The report goes on to point out that,

The judges didn’t go that far, but they did say the federal government’s detainer requests, which ask local governments to hold illegal immigrants for pickup, are legal. Localities can refuse based on their own resources, the court ruled — but the detainer requests are legal, the judges said.

This relates to a Texas law so clarify further,

Immigrant rights advocates and a number of Texas cities objected. They said detainers forced state or local police to hold illegal immigrants beyond their usual release time, infringing on their Fourth Amendment rights.

But Judge Edith H. Jones, writing the court’s opinion, said it’s not clear that illegal immigrants are covered by the Fourth Amendment. Beyond that, she said, federal detainer requests are legitimate.

Not clear they are covered under the 4th Amendment. That’s going to push some buttons.

She said that under the Trump administration’s policy, ICE officers must issue administrative warrants to accompany their detainer requests. Those warrants serve as statements of probable cause that local police can rely on to hold someone — just as they would do for any other police officer who makes a valid request.

“Here the ICE-detainer mandate itself authorizes and requires state officers to carry out federal detention requests,” Judge Jones wrote.

The court did rule part of Texas’ law that prohibited local elected officials from endorsing sanctuary policies to be problematic because it could be seen as an infringement on the officials’ free speech rights. But she said the state can prevent a locality from adopting or enforcing a sanctuary policy and can impose penalties on officials who attempt to create sanctuaries.

So, states can prevent cities or counties from adopting or enforcing sanctuary policies, but they can’t stop people from talking about wanting to do it, which is good because the First Amendment wouldn’t stand for that.

This is a yuge victory for Mr. Trump, but don’t expect it to last. Some other court will be quick to issue an order on some other case, contradicting this one, and we’ll continue to have problems until SCOTUS is forced to deal with the contraditions.

>