Connect with us

Politics

Another Judge Defies The Constitution By Blocking Trump Administration From Fighting Sanctuary Cities

When Democrats ruled Congress for about forty years, they continually created laws and programs that were based on people sending their money via federal taxes to Washington, only to have it sent back to them, at the will of the elitist politicians, and usually for compliance with their top-down policies.  For example, if states changed the federal 55 miles per hour speed limits on their highways, the federal government threatened to withhold their highway funding, even though that money originated in the states in the first place.  Judges rarely, if ever, interfered.

A federal judge in Manhattan undermined the Trump administration’s serious crackdown on sanctuary cities Friday, calling the White House’s move to limit federal funds to cities that defy immigration law “arbitrary and capricious.”  It was never arbitrary and capricious when Democrats withheld funding for non compliance with laws that can be argued were fully unconstitutional, since they aren’t enumerated in the Constitution, yet we have judge after judge after left-wing judge siding with the leftist “Resistance” to block President Trump from implementing what are clearly his Constitutionally authorized duties.  And it’s not like this situation is over some innocuous effort of the federal government to flex its muscles.  Sanctuary cities are in direct violation of the federal government’s authority over immigration.

A federal judge in Manhattan landed another blow to the Trump administration’s immigration policies Friday, blocking efforts to punish cities for protecting immigrants from the feds by blocking grants to local law enforcement, writes the New York Post.

“As we argued, local law enforcement has the right to decide how to meet their local public safety needs — and the Trump administration simply does not have the right to require state and local police to act as federal immigration agents,” New York state Attorney General Barbara Underwood said in a statement. “The Trump administration’s attempt to withhold these vital funds was nothing more than a political attack at the expense of our public safety.”

It’s not about requiring state and local law enforcement to act as federal agents; it’s about state and local politicians ordering their law enforcement to defy federal immigration agencies from doing their jobs.

When you have politicians like Oakland, California Mayor Libby Schaaf who blew the whistle on a raid by federal immigration authorities, warning criminal illegal aliens about the raid in advance, that’s a far cry from requiring “state and local police to act as federal immigration agents.”  And that sort of thing is happening all over the country.

A similar court ruling in San Francisco blocked the President’s “efforts” in attempting to deny asylum seekers traveling with the migrant caravan.

When Arizona created a state law that allowed state and local law enforcement to capture and hand over illegal aliens in their jurisdiction to federal law enforcement, President Barack Obama sued the state on the grounds that immigration is under the authority of the federal government.  And he was right.  Article 1, Section  8 of the Constitution gives the federal Congress the power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization.  It doesn’t mention the states or local municipalities.  Someone should clue these federal judges in as they have most certainly never read the Constitution.  So, if liberals championed Obama’s lawsuit, and they agreed with the Constitutional concept of power over immigration back then, how, then are they doing a complete 180 now with their support of sanctuary cities?  Liberals can’t have it both ways without creating a crisis, and many believe they want a crisis in immigration policy to change the laws and allow more and more people from around the world, preferably those who will vote Democrat, to be able to come here any time they wish.

Of course, we know that the Supreme Court will rule in favor of the Trump administration as it will rule in favor of the Constitution, but think of the damage these activist judges are doing, knowing full well that their rulings are based not on Constitutional law, but on the hatred of President Donald Trump.  We have to rein in these judges who are defying the Constitution in the name of the Resistance.  They know that there will be zero consequences for their actions, and they are becoming more and more blatant in their activism roles every day.  The judiciary does not have the right to defy the Constitution, and that is exactly what many of them are doing when they so transparently rule against it, all in the name of fighting Trump.  This problem will lead to the death of our republic if it’s allowed to continue and expand among the judiciary.

SOURCE: Hannity

To stay up to date with David’s No Nonsense News, make sure to subscribe to his newsletter on his website and follow him on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube @DavidJHarrisJr

Advertisements

Politics

Trump: ‘If I Had One Do-Over, It Would Be…’

In an interview that aired on Sunday, President Donald Trump admitted that his biggest regret was appointing Jeff Sessions as his attorney general, and said that if he had a do-over, the nomination would have gone to someone else.

In an appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press” Trump made the comments about his former attorney general who resigned right after the midterms back in November after a plethora of criticism from the president via social media.  It was at the height of the Mueller investigation, and Trump was openly critical of Sessions’ decision to recuse himself from the probe in early 2017.

In the past, Trump said, “I don’t have an attorney general. It is very sad.”  The president’s disillusion in Sessions wasn’t just about the Russia collusion witch hunt.  He said he wasn’t happy with “the border” and “numerous” other issues that Sessions’ office affected.

“Every President deserves an Attorney General they have confidence in,” Trump tweeted. “I believe every President has a right to their Cabinet, these are not lifetime appointments. You serve at the pleasure of the President.”

Sessions recused himself the day after he was confirmed and sworn in as attorney general, but he never confided to the president that he was going to do so.  The only reason he recused himself was because during his confirmation hearing the Democrats made such a stink about Sessions being a surrogate to the Trump campaign during the 2016 election that they felt he couldn’t be neutral overseeing the FBI investigation into Russian collusion.  Remember, this was before the Mueller witch hunt began.

As time went on, America discovered that the whole Trump-Russia collusion probe was a hoax that served two purposes; a tool for Democrats to use to impeach Trump, and to cover up the Obama administration’s interference in the 2016 election by spying on the Trump campaign and by exonerating Hillary Clinton of the many crimes she committed while serving as Obama’s secretary of state, so that she could go on to win the election.



My book is here!  And I personally handed a copy to our President at the White House!!! I hope you enjoy it !

BOOK – Why I Couldn't Stay Silent

Follow David on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Patreon and YouTube @DavidJHarrisJr

Advertisements
Continue Reading

Politics

MN Star-Tribune FINALLY Reports on Ilhan Omar Being Married to Two Men at Once

This story has been out there for a year, but now The Minnesota Star-Tribune is finally reporting on the fact that Ilhan Omar could have been married to two men at once, and that one of the men might have been her own brother. I guess there was only so long they could sit on the story, since it didn’t go away, but in fact became more noticeable since she filed a joint return with a man she may not have been married to in 2014 and 2015. At that time she was still married to Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, her alleged brother.

From The Gateway Pundit

On Saturday, after several months of this story being reported online, the Minnesota Star-Tribune finally reported that Ilhan Omar was married to two men at once and “possible her own brother.”

New investigative documents released by a state agency have given fresh life to lingering questions about the marital history of Rep. Ilhan Omar and whether she once married a man — possibly her own brother — to skirt immigration laws.

Omar has denied the allegations in the past, dismissing them as “baseless rumors” first raised in an online Somali politics forum and championed by conservative bloggers during her 2016 campaign for the Minnesota House. But she said little then or since about Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, the former husband who swept into her life in 2009 before a 2011 separation.

The questions surfaced again this month in a state probe of campaign finance violations showing that Omar filed federal taxes in 2014 and 2015 with her current husband, Ahmed Hirsi, while she was still legally married to but separated from Elmi.



My book is here!  And I personally handed a copy to our President at the White House!!! I hope you enjoy it @realDonaldTrump!

BOOK – Why I Couldn’t Stay Silent

Thank you @RealCandaceO for writing the foreword for it!!! #BLEXIT #Woke#WeTheFree #WalkAway

Follow David on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Patreon and YouTube @DavidJHarrisJr

Advertisements
Continue Reading

Politics

Supreme Court To Hand Down Ruling On The Citizenship Question On The Census

The U.S. Supreme Court is close to handing down its ruling on whether the Trump administration can include a citizenship question on the 2020 census.  The question of citizenship has been on the census in the past, but the same question today is a political powder keg because of how leftists view illegal aliens living here as “Unregistered Democrats.”  Many are against it because Donald Trump is the one proposing it.  Trump Derangement Syndrome is very strong among those who go against a president’s Constitutional authority simply because it’s Donald Trump.

There have been many legal challenges since the question was announced in early 2018.

People against the citizenship question have cited studies (there’s always a study) that say the question may lead to an inaccurate population count.  I think they really fear the exact opposite.  Leftists have been telling us since the 1980’s that there are 11 million illegal aliens living in the country.  If we know that hundreds of thousands enter the country illegaly every year, with an outlook of one million coming in this year alone, it stands to reason that the number of illegals living in the country is much higher, and leftists don’t want the real number to be exposed.

Another reason leftists don’t want the question added to the census is because the population count is the data that the federal government uses to determine congressional districts, and the number of people living in certain areas determines how much federal funding states get.  This one is particularly despicable.  Leftists want to count lawbreakers who are here illegally as citizens in order to bump up the amount of federal funding for states, creating an artificial need for higher dollar amounts for grants and funding for programs, etc. which is supposed to go toward American citizens.  Illegals should get no federal funding whatsoever, but that money, and the potential for future Democrat Party registrations, is where we are in this debate.

I don’t think anyone can name any other country that you can enter illegally, take social benefits at the cost of its citizens, not register for the draft, get a driver’s license, and then get counted in a government census as a citizen.  The very fact that groups of people are arguing against the citizenship question is a dire warning that something has gone very wrong with a segment of our society.  Can someone please let Satan know that there’s a hole in his fence?

The administration has been adamant in its insistence that including the question is necessary to enforce the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

Leftists, who will go to any length to win any cause, are now spitting and jumping up and down over a potential political motivation behind adding the citizenship question.  Of course it’s bullschtein, but when has using bullschtein ever stopped Democrats in the past?  It’s practically in their platform.

From The Hill:

Critics say that records found on the hard drive of late GOP strategist Thomas Hofeller, who earned a reputation for helping Republicans in the redrawing of several key district maps in recent years, show he was involved in the creation of the citizenship question.

Emails between Hofeller, who died last year, and Mark Neuman, a top census adviser to Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, have been filed in New York federal court as evidence that the question is designed to benefit Republicans.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which has filed the court documents, has pointed to a 2015 study conducted by Hofeller that found a citizenship question would help Republicans in redistricting while harming Hispanic communities.

In Maryland, another lawsuit on the census question revealed court documents showing Hofeller and Census Bureau staffer Christa Jones corresponded in 2015 about the question.  It’s interesting how now many leftists are throwing Barack Obama under the bus to get what they want, as if discarding an old tool that ran out of its usefulness.

Judge George Hazel, an Obama appointee (of course) who is overseeing the Maryland case, has opined that he will reconsider the question of discriminatory intent behind the citizenship question being proposed in light of the “new evidence.”

Oh Puhleeeeease!  The bottom line here is that nobody has said that illegal aliens won’t be counted.  They just won’t be counted as citizens — and there is no legal reason they should be.  They will be counted as illegal aliens, or “non-citizens”, “Future Democrats” or whatever less offensive term leftists accept.



My book is here!  And I personally handed a copy to our President at the White House!!! I hope you enjoy it !

BOOK – Why I Couldn't Stay Silent

Follow David on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Patreon and YouTube @DavidJHarrisJr

Advertisements
Continue Reading

Trending Now