Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!
  1. Folks, some of you have asked if we were trimming our forums since there are no sports at the moment. We’re going to keep everything open on the forums to provide a sense of normalcy here. It’s our hope Gator Country can be a place of comfort for you during these crazy times. Be safe my friends and take care. -Ray and the GC staff. GO GATORS IN AL KINDS OF WEATHER!

    PS. If you happen to find yourself in tight financial circumstances with regards to renewing here please reach out to us. We’d be happy to help sort it out.

Trump Administration Gets Court Victory in Sanctuary Cities Case

Discussion in 'GatorNana's Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by OklahomaGator, Feb 26, 2020.

  1. OklahomaGator

    OklahomaGator Jedi Administrator Moderator VIP Member

    Apr 3, 2007
    Miami, OK
    Trump Administration Gets Court Victory in Sanctuary Cities Case

    I'm sure this will be appealed and end up at the Supreme Court.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. homer

    homer GC Legend

    Nov 2, 2015
    Yay team
    • Funny Funny x 1
  3. ThePlayer

    ThePlayer VIP Member

    Apr 3, 2007
    Pretty incredible when our own local government officials are hiding criminals and illegals.
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Best Post Ever Best Post Ever x 1
  4. AzCatFan

    AzCatFan GC Hall of Fame

    Apr 9, 2007
    There's a difference between actually hiding criminals and illegals and not cooperating with the Feds. One is active. The other is passive. And ever wonder why cities choose to be sanctuaries? Simple. Sanctuary cities are safer than non-sanctuary cities of equal size.

    This goes all the way back to why San Francisco decided to be the first sanctuary city all the way back in the late 1970s. They had a high immigrant population that was also a high crime area. The local police were having issues getting anyone to talk and cooperate out of fear of deportation, or someone close to them being deported. San Fran decided to declare a sanctuary policy, and now, 40+ years later, San Francisco's homicide rate is at its lowest in 60 years!

    The court ruling, if upheld by the SCOTUS, as it will presumably end up there, will only hurt sanctuary cities and make them less safe. Fed funds are often used to help pay for more officers and/or better technology that make police work better. Remove these funds, and there are less police with less tools to make the cities safer. If these cities decide to keep the fed money and drop the sanctuary status, assuming Trump wins again, then these sanctuary cities become less safe like their already non-sanctuary city counterparts.
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  5. citygator

    citygator Premium Member

    Apr 3, 2007
    100% BS. If the federal government believes a state isn’t following appropriate laws there is a recourse within its power. Withhold money that was sent in by a state’s citizens for its proper use isn’t it.

    Total politicization of the budget is occurring. Grafting funds from military for an unpopular domestic wall and affecting state funding based on politics is a crime.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. VAg8r1

    VAg8r1 GC Hall of Fame

    Apr 8, 2007
    "Sanctuary cities" actually enhance law enforcement. Law enforcement agencies frequently rely on the cooperation of residents of communities to solve crimes. Referring to individuals whose only crime is illegal presence in the US to ICE greatly reduces cooperation from communities with illegal residents and it's not just the illegals that will refuse to cooperate. Good community relations are essential to law enforcement and creating a situation in which members of a community distrust the police is beneficial to no one although it probably plays well among Trump's nativist supporters.
    Why Sanctuary Cities Are Safer
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. duchen

    duchen VIP Member

    Nov 25, 2017
    The problem to be reconciled are the decisions concerning indefinite holds, holding people after their sentences are concluded, etc.
  8. CNNgator

    CNNgator All American

    Apr 8, 2007
    so States' rights only apply when they feed your narrative,..umm ok
    • Like Like x 2
  9. LouisvilleGator

    LouisvilleGator GC Hall of Fame

    Oct 16, 2012
    Trey Gowdy, at his finest, regarding "sanctuary" cities. Enjoy:

    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  10. OklahomaGator

    OklahomaGator Jedi Administrator Moderator VIP Member

    Apr 3, 2007
    Miami, OK
  11. mutz87

    mutz87 Leon's getting larger VIP Member

    Aug 30, 2014
    When Trump wins in court, America loses
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  12. WarDamnGator

    WarDamnGator GC Hall of Fame

    Apr 8, 2007
    Smaller Government! Local Control! Except for when we don't like it ...
  13. Gatorrick22

    Gatorrick22 GC Hall of Fame

    Apr 3, 2007
    Do you really think that these illegals will never enter another state? Really? That's rich....
  14. fubar1

    fubar1 Premium Member

    Apr 3, 2007
    Jacksonville, FL
    It's a great thing the upper courts don't agree with you.
  15. VAg8r1

    VAg8r1 GC Hall of Fame

    Apr 8, 2007
    Legally, it's probably the correct decision. Rationally, it will be counter-productive by providing a disincentive for cooperating with law enforcement authorities and not just by undocumented individuals but by others in the community where they reside. See the link in post #6. The implicit rationale of number of posters in this thread is that apprehension of illegal should take precedence over more effective law enforcement.
  16. PerSeGator

    PerSeGator GC Legend

    Jun 14, 2014
    I don’t think the federal government should have any ability to coerce state action through the spending power. It is completely contrary to our system of federalism.