With or without 'sanctuary,' Uncle Sam always has the upper hand
SAN DIEGO -- The whole idea of "sanctuary" is one of the biggest scams in the immigration debate.
Whether you're a conservative or a liberal, you may have heard about these magical provinces where undocumented immigrants live happily ever after because federal immigration law doesn't apply -- and, oh yes, leprechauns ride unicorns through fields of four-leaf clover.
Brace yourselves. Both political parties are lying to the American people -- again. Democrats get to pretend that they're protecting undocumented immigrants from deportation as they pursue the votes of Latinos and immigration activists. Republicans get to beat their chests and claim they're the only ones who are tough on illegal immigrants, even though they tend to be soft on those who employ them.
Even the judicial branch is caught up in the charade. Last week, a federal appeals court ruled that the Justice Department can withhold millions of dollars in grants from cities and states that resist having local and state police turned into amateur immigration agents. The ruling overturned the order of a district court judge who had sided with the localities and demanded that the funding be released.
The sanctuary myth is strong. There are countless Americans who honestly think that there are, in this country, hundreds of cities and counties that have successfully walled themselves off from the reach of federal immigration enforcement.
What's next? A county in Iowa where, by decree of the board of supervisors, residents who don't pay taxes need not worry about getting a visit from the Internal Revenue Service? A municipality in South Dakota where officials pass a resolution declaring that locals need not abide by federal gun laws because agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives aren't welcome within city limits?
Federalism won't permit that. The issue of who wins when state and local governments decide to square off against the federal government was settled in the 1960s when rogue governors in the South tried unsuccessfully to prevent African Americans from entering the University of Mississippi and the University of Alabama.
Actually, the matter was first settled way back in 1787 in Philadelphia. The Supremacy Clause of the Constitution makes clear that federal laws are the "supreme Law of the Land" and override any conflicting local or state laws.
The good news is that, when the least amount of pressure is applied, reality prevails. And the sanctuary lie comes unraveled.
That's what happened in Southern California recently when Immigration and Customs Enforcement served a handful of federal subpoenas to the San Diego County Sheriff's Department. ICE wanted the jail records for four Mexican immigrants -- ages 28 to 42 -- who were arrested by local police, over the last few months, for various suspected crimes ranging from robbery and battery to drug possession and sexual assault of a child. Activists were concerned that ICE planned to use the records to initiate deportation proceedings, and they claimed that the subpoenas undermined the spirit of SB 54 -- the so-called sanctuary state law that supposedly prevents local law enforcement agencies from being overly cooperative with federal immigration officials.
...continued
