Democrats and Republicans are heading for a showdown. And the Federal Government is heading for a shutdown.
Democrats are demanding a “fix” for DACA, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program that expires in March. Nearly 800,000 men and women—the sons and daughters of illegal aliens who entered the United States decades ago—stand to be deported if a “fix” isn’t found.
DACA, which began in 2012, protects these people from deportation and allows them to work legally.
In September, 2017, President Donald Trump stripped protections from these “Dreamers” and gave Congress six months to write a law to resolve their plight.
Republicans, in turn, want a stopgap bill to fund the Federal Government through February 16 to avert a shutdown. But they don’t want to provide protections for “Dreamers.”
Illegal aliens crossing into the United States
President Trump is pushing his own solution to illegal immigration: A massive, impenetrable wall along the U.S.-Mexican border. The cost: Billions of dollars.
But there is a more effective—and cheaper—way to attack illegal immigration: Attack the “sanctuary cities” across the nation that illegally shield violators of Federal immigration laws from arrest.
Among the 31 “sanctuary cities” of this country: Washington, D.C.; New York City; Los Angeles; Chicago; San Francisco; Santa Ana; San Diego; Salt Lake City; Phoenix; Dallas; Houston; Austin; Detroit; Jersey City; Minneapolis; Miami; Denver; Baltimore; Seattle; Portland, Oregon; New Haven, Connecticut; and Portland, Maine.
These cities have adopted “sanctuary” ordinances that forbid municipal funds or resources to be used to enforce federal immigration laws. This usually translates into not allowing police or municipal employees to inquire about one’s immigration status.
Trump simply needs to cut off Federal funding to those cities which systematically defy the immigration laws of the United States.
And on March 27, 2017, his attorney general, Jeff Sessions, threatened to do just that.
“The Department of Justice will require that jurisdictions seeking or applying for DOJ grants to certify compliance with [U.S. Code 1373] as a condition of receiving those awards,” said Sessions in a surprise appearance at the White House Briefing Room.
His reference was to Federal laws which state that cities cannot prevent federal authorities from enforcing immigration laws.
Immigration is regulated at the federal level, chiefly under the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). And in 1986, Congress passed the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), to curb illegal immigration, deny welfare benefits to illegal aliens and strengthen penalize employers who hire them.
“Block funding for sanctuary cities. We block the funding. No more funding,” Trump said in August, 2016, when he laid out his immigration plans at a rally in Phoenix. “Cities that refuse to cooperate with federal authorities will not receive taxpayer dollars.”
New York City, for example, could lose up to $10.4 billion in Federal funding. Its agencies that receive the biggest share of these monies: The Housing Authority, the Administration for Children’s Services and the Department of Social Services.
Mayors from “sanctuary cities” such as New York, Chicago, Baltimore and San Francisco have threatened to resist Trump’s threat.
Trump has never before held public office. But, as a businessman, he well knows how to appeal to people’s greed and selfishness.
By blocking monies to “sanctuary cities,” Trump will quickly drive a wedge between ardent liberals such as Bill de Blazio and their constituents who depend on those infusions of Federal monies.
In New York, for example, once Federal monies are cut off:
- Legal American citizens won’t be able to obtain assistance for low- and moderate-income families to rent housing in the private market.
- American children needing care for their emotional or medical needs will be denied it.
- Americans wanting to adopt a foster care child will be unable to do so–because there won’t be monies to pay the officials who now staff these agencies.
In short: The beautiful “every-man-is-my-brother” theories of liberal politicians are about to slam head-on into the ugliness of real-world needs and wants.
And when legal citizens can’t obtain the government services they have been used to getting, they will quickly become enraged.
At first, many—perhaps most—of the people living in “sanctuary cities” will rush to support their elected officials in refusing to knuckle under.
But as time passes, public needs will go unmet while Federal monies continue to be blocked.
First they will aim their rage at the local—and elected—officials of these cities responsible for “sanctuary” policies. And then they will focus their anger on the illegal aliens being protected by civic officials.
This will be followed by increasing demands by legal—and law-abiding—American citizens for their elected officials to cooperate with Federal immigration agents.
As tensions rise, so will demands for the election of new mayors and supervisors. And the chief demand of those voters will be: “Turn over the illegal aliens and restore our public services!”
Some citizens will almost certainly take out their anger on anyone who even looks Hispanic, let alone speaks only Spanish.
And those citizens who feel conscience-torn by demanding an end to “sanctuary cities” will console themselves with this literal truth: Illegal immigration is against the law—and local officials have a sworn duty to obey the law at all levels—including those laws they don’t agree with.
Bureaucracybuster's Blog 
ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, ANCHOR BABIES, AUSTIN, BALTIMORE, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHICAGO, CNN, DAILY KOS, DALLAS, DEMOCRATIC PARTY, DENVER, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DETROIT, DONALD TRUMP, ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE, FACEBOOK, HISPANICS, HOUSTON, ILLEGAL ALIENS, illegal immigration, JERSEY CITY, LOS ANGELES, MEXICAN WALL, MEXICO, MIAMI, MINNEAPOLIS, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NANCY PELOSI, NBC NEWS, NEW HAVEN, NEW YORK CITY, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PHOENIX, POLITICO, PORTLAND, RAW STORY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, SALON, SALT LAKE CITY, SAN DIEGO, SAN FRANCISCO, SANTA ANA, SEATTLE, SLATE, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, USA TODAY, WASHINGTON D.C.
TRUMP: FLOOD SANCTUARY CITIES WITH ILLEGALS
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on April 15, 2019 at 12:06 amPresident Donald J. Trump is vigorously pursuing his own solution to illegal immigration: A massive, impenetrable wall along the U.S.-Mexican border.
And Democrats in the House of Representatives are just as vigorously rejecting it.
So Trump is raising the stakes—and threatening to send countless numbers of illegal aliens to “sanctuary cities” that defy United States immigration laws.
Among those 31 “sanctuary cities”: Washington, D.C.; New York City; Los Angeles; Chicago; San Francisco; Santa Ana; San Diego; Salt Lake City; Phoenix; Dallas; Houston; Austin; Detroit; Jersey City; Minneapolis; Miami; Denver; Baltimore; Seattle; Portland, Oregon; New Haven, Connecticut; and Portland, Maine.
These cities have adopted “sanctuary” ordinances that forbid municipal funds or resources to be used to enforce Federal immigration laws. This usually means forbidding police or municipal employees to inquire about people’s immigration status.
On April 12, Trump tweeted: “Due to the fact that Democrats are unwilling to change our very dangerous immigration laws, we are indeed, as reported, giving strong considerations to placing Illegal Immigrants in Sanctuary Cities only. The Radical Left always seems to have an Open Borders, Open Arms policy—so this should make them very happy!”
Donald Trump
One of the cities Trump intends to target is San Francisco—the district of Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Reacting to this news, Pelosi’s spokeswoman, Ashley Etienne said in a statement: “The extent of this administration’s cynicism and cruelty cannot be overstated. Using human beings—including little children—as pawns in their warped game to perpetuate fear and demonize immigrants is despicable.”
Undoubtedly Pelosi realizes the anger she would face among her constituents if they found themselves flooded by tens of thousands of illegal aliens making demands on already stretched housing, schools and hospitals.
Nancy Pelosi
Since these aliens come from Central America, Spanish—not English—is their only language. Which means their children would have to be given costly ESL assistance throughout their schooling.
And since most of these people have only rudimentary skills, they would require massive public assistance. And this in a city already plagued by 7,500 to 12,000 “homeless.”
On April 11, the Washington Post had reported that the Trump administration proposed last November and again in February to send illegal aliens to “sanctuary cities.”
The White House and Department of Homeland Security claimed that the proposal was no longer being considered.
Then, on April 12, in a White House meeting with reporters, Trump contradicted those denials: “We might as well do what they always say they want. We will bring the illegal—I call them the illegals, they came across the border illegally—we will bring them to sanctuary city areas and let that particular area take care of it, whether it is a state or whatever it might be.”
Trump never held public office before reaching the White House. But, as a businessman, he well knows how to appeal to people’s greed and selfishness.
By flooding “sanctuary cities” with tens of thousands of illegal aliens, Trump will quickly drive a wedge between ardent liberals such as Nancy Pelosi and their constituents.
In short: The beautiful “every-man-is-my-brother” theories of liberal politicians are about to slam head-on into the ugliness of real-world needs and wants.
This is, in fact, now taking place in Tijuana, Mexico.
In November, 2018, Trump deployed the United States military and closed the U.S.-Mexico border to prevent a 5,000-member Central American caravan from entering the country.
By November 19, migrants had begun piling up in Tijuana, which borders San Diego.
Suddenly, Tijuana became increasingly overcrowded. And its residents began carrying signs reading “No illegals,” “No to the invasion” and “Mexico First.” And marching in the streets wearing Mexico’s red, white and green national soccer jersey and vigorously waving Mexican flags.
“We want the caravan to go; they are invading us,” said Patricia Reyes, a 62-year-old protester. “They should have come into Mexico correctly, legally, but they came in like animals.”
When legal citizens—whether Mexican or American—can’t obtain the government services they have been used to getting, they quickly become enraged.
At first, many—perhaps most—of those living in “sanctuary cities” will vigorously support their elected officials in refusing to knuckle under.
But as time passes, public needs will go unmet while local monies become increasingly strained.
First, legal citizens will rage at the local officials of these cities responsible for “sanctuary” policies. Then they will focus their anger on the illegal aliens being protected by those civic officials.
They will increasingly demand that their elected officials to cooperate with Federal immigration agents.
As tensions rise, so will demands for the election of new mayors and supervisors. And the chief demand of those voters will be: “Turn over the illegal aliens and restore our public services!”
Some citizens will almost certainly take out their anger on anyone who even looks Hispanic, let alone speaks only Spanish.
And those citizens who feel conscience-torn by demanding an end to “sanctuary cities” will console themselves with this literal truth: Illegal immigration is against the law—and local officials have a sworn duty to obey the law at all levels—including those laws they don’t agree with.
Share this:
Like this: