6 ms·

> The party is MAGA and that party is pro-dictatorship. remember the "sanctuary city" thing? That kind of blind obeisance to the tribe and defiance to the fede

> The party is MAGA and that party is pro-dictatorship. remember the "sanctuary city" thing? That kind of blind obeisance to the tribe and defiance to the federal government smells awfully like what MAGA does today.But let me guess: it's okay when your tribe does it?

bdangubic 1y ago
sanctuary cities are there partly due to government trying to be (just a little bit :) ) lawless… if ruling party was obeying the laws there wouldn’t be any need for “sanctuary cities” so pick another example your “tribe” in particular is *all about State rights” unless of course States do what the Tzar doesn’t like, right?!
- philipallstar 1y ago
  Sanctuary cities are there to shelter people who enter the country illegally. That's not the government being lawless. They were not a reaction to recent ICE moves; you've no history, and have reversed cause and effect. In the 1980s they were a great moral move originally by the southwestern churches, they've just expanded into electorate jerrymandering and virtue signalling.
  - jeltz 1y ago
    Nonsense, how does sanctuary cities anything at all to du with gerrymandering?
    - philipallstar 1y ago
      If people can vote without proving citizenship, then you can just import illegal immigrants who will vote for you.
      - raw_anon_1111 1y ago
        This is a boogeyman that needs to die. Conservative groups have been trying to find evidence of substantial illegal votes for decades and the only illegal votes are the false electors that Trump’s cronies used to try to steal an election in 2020.
  - amalcon 1y ago
    So-called "sanctuary cities" have made the judgement that their law enforcement apparatus will be more effective if people who fear immigration authorities are willing to interface with it. They can't and don't stop enforcement actions by federal authorities (see Chicago, right now) - but they view active cooperation with those efforts as detrimental to other law enforcement activities. You might disagree with that assessment, but it is a straightforward exercise of the municipal power to allocate its own resources. Claiming that they are "there to shelter people who enter the country illegally" is disingenuous at best. In reality, that is neither the goal nor the effect.
    - bdangubic 1y ago
      educated and sane comments like this don’t do well when debating issues that people believe politicians about :)
- dragonwriter 1y ago
  Sanctuary city laws were largely driven by local law enforcement and community services agencies and the way fear of being targeted (personally, or family, or community members) by immigration authorities in the event of law enforcement or other government contact complicated enforcement of local enforcement of non-immigration laws and delivery of local services in communities with significant immigrant populations; mitigating that fear related to contact with local government and leaving enforcement of federal law to federal authorities improved the ability of local governments to serve their own priorities.
- acdha 1y ago
  In my city, the origin of those laws was partially trying to push the national discourse for immigration reform but mostly due to wanting law enforcement, public health, and education to work better. Without legal paths, you inevitably get people who are joining relatives who are here legally, trying to appeal refugee decisions, etc. where those people are not causing problems but could be victims of crimes everyone wants to be reported and you don’t want perverse incentives like a minor who is a citizen being deprived of education or other support because they have a caretaker who is not a legal resident and doesn’t want to listen to themselves on official forms.
wredcoll 1y ago
So this is a fascinating example of left vs right thinking. To those on the left, why you do things matter. Breaking a law that is widely regarded as unjust is considered to be a moral action as long as it helps people. The difference is being able to understand that "defying the federal government" is neither an absolute moral good nor is it an evil. Why you're doing it is the more important reason.
- raw_anon_1111 1y ago
  Yes next up - look at all of those evil lawless people during the civil rights movement who dared stand up against Jim Crow laws More recently, the difference between leaning on tech companies during an epidemic and a President leaning on companies to personally give him money.
  - strictnein 1y ago
    > "leaning on tech companies during an epidemic" The government partnering with businesses to restrict speech is actually a really bad thing. Thankfully we've pulled back from that now. Trump being corrupt and a garbage human doesn't negate that fact.
    - raw_anon_1111 1y ago
      We have pulled back from that with Trump suing companies who have said things against him and then paying him off - see Paramount, Disney, Facebook, X, and Google. Not to mention the new press corp policy that everything that press says about the Pentagon has to be approved by the government. It was a policy so abhorrent that Fox News even refused to sign. He even threatened to take away ABCs broadcast license because someone criticized a dead racist podcaster. Conservatives all over the US - especially in “the free state of Florida” - are firing public officials who criticize him. (and every time I dare say that Kirk was a racist who said a good “patriot” should bail out the person who best Pelosi’s husband almost to death, I get flagged) https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/11/charlie-kirk-quotes-beliefs https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/11/charlie-kirk...
Spooky23 1y ago
Municipal government does not have any power, obligation nor responsibility to enforce federal law. Lowering themselves to be federal snitches, they reduce compliance with state and local laws which actually impact the public, and create a variety of other problems that hurt the community. Where does it end? Should states investigate purchases that may enable the violation of federal law? You realize that there’s almost no limit to what can be technically constructed to be a federal felony. Why is immigration so special? To conservative thinkers, sitting behind their keyboards in the cushy suburbs, the concept of states’ rights ends with the oppression of minority voting and pillaging of the environment. Anyone, regardless of politics, who is comparing that legal concept to support of the lawlessness the regime is carrying out should really look within.
amanaplanacanal 1y ago
From what I can tell, all Sanctuary City means is that locals will not cooperate with federal law enforcement unless it is legally required. Which seems right to me? States are independent entities with their own laws.
- dragonwriter 1y ago
  Exactly, sanctuary city/state laws are an application of 10th Amendment reserved powers of the states, and particularly the principle known as the “anti-commandeering doctrine”, hinted at in in dicta concerning hypotheticals regarding the Fugitive Slave Laws in cases shortly before the Civil War and first applied as a basis for judgement by the Supreme Court in New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992). Even where the Constitution grants the federal government authority to make laws and to provide for their enforcement, it generally does not have the power to direct states to use their resources to enforce those laws. Sanctuary laws simply restrict the conditions in which state or local resources will be used to enforce certain federal laws.
raw_anon_1111 1y ago
They just said they won’t be deputized to do something that’s the federal government’s responsibility any more than a city government is responsible for going after federal tax evaders.
cestith 1y ago
The “sanctuary city” label was applied to local governments doing what local governments are supposed to do. There’s nothing in the US Constitution which forces cities, counties, and states to enforce Federal laws. That’s why there are Federal law enforcement agencies, and more of them than most people know. The FBI, CBP, ICE, US Postal Service, USDA, the Park Service, the Secret Service, the US Marshalls, the Marine Fisheries Service, USACID, US Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Office of Odometer Fraud Investigation, Administrative Office of the United States Courts Office of Probation and Pretrial Services, Tennessee Valley Authority Police and Emergency Management, DEA, ATF, all the departmental offices of Inspectors General, and a whole bunch more account for over 130,000 officers with powers of arrest (and usually armed, or will otherwise partner with armed agents from somewhere else). Cities and counties should be enforcing city, county, and state laws. They are not political subdivisions directly of the federal government, and their taxes and resources should be spent on their own jurisdictions.

bdangubic 1y ago

sanctuary cities are there partly due to government trying to be (just a little bit :) ) lawless… if ruling party was obeying the laws there wouldn’t be any need for “sanctuary cities” so pick another example your “tribe” in particular is *all about State rights” unless of course States do what the Tzar doesn’t like, right?!

philipallstar 1y ago
Sanctuary cities are there to shelter people who enter the country illegally. That's not the government being lawless. They were not a reaction to recent ICE moves; you've no history, and have reversed cause and effect. In the 1980s they were a great moral move originally by the southwestern churches, they've just expanded into electorate jerrymandering and virtue signalling.
- jeltz 1y ago
  Nonsense, how does sanctuary cities anything at all to du with gerrymandering?
  - philipallstar 1y ago
    If people can vote without proving citizenship, then you can just import illegal immigrants who will vote for you.
    - raw_anon_1111 1y ago
      This is a boogeyman that needs to die. Conservative groups have been trying to find evidence of substantial illegal votes for decades and the only illegal votes are the false electors that Trump’s cronies used to try to steal an election in 2020.
- amalcon 1y ago
  So-called "sanctuary cities" have made the judgement that their law enforcement apparatus will be more effective if people who fear immigration authorities are willing to interface with it. They can't and don't stop enforcement actions by federal authorities (see Chicago, right now) - but they view active cooperation with those efforts as detrimental to other law enforcement activities. You might disagree with that assessment, but it is a straightforward exercise of the municipal power to allocate its own resources. Claiming that they are "there to shelter people who enter the country illegally" is disingenuous at best. In reality, that is neither the goal nor the effect.
  - bdangubic 1y ago
    educated and sane comments like this don’t do well when debating issues that people believe politicians about :)
dragonwriter 1y ago
Sanctuary city laws were largely driven by local law enforcement and community services agencies and the way fear of being targeted (personally, or family, or community members) by immigration authorities in the event of law enforcement or other government contact complicated enforcement of local enforcement of non-immigration laws and delivery of local services in communities with significant immigrant populations; mitigating that fear related to contact with local government and leaving enforcement of federal law to federal authorities improved the ability of local governments to serve their own priorities.
acdha 1y ago
In my city, the origin of those laws was partially trying to push the national discourse for immigration reform but mostly due to wanting law enforcement, public health, and education to work better. Without legal paths, you inevitably get people who are joining relatives who are here legally, trying to appeal refugee decisions, etc. where those people are not causing problems but could be victims of crimes everyone wants to be reported and you don’t want perverse incentives like a minor who is a citizen being deprived of education or other support because they have a caretaker who is not a legal resident and doesn’t want to listen to themselves on official forms.

wredcoll 1y ago

So this is a fascinating example of left vs right thinking. To those on the left, why you do things matter. Breaking a law that is widely regarded as unjust is considered to be a moral action as long as it helps people. The difference is being able to understand that "defying the federal government" is neither an absolute moral good nor is it an evil. Why you're doing it is the more important reason.

raw_anon_1111 1y ago
Yes next up - look at all of those evil lawless people during the civil rights movement who dared stand up against Jim Crow laws More recently, the difference between leaning on tech companies during an epidemic and a President leaning on companies to personally give him money.
- strictnein 1y ago
  > "leaning on tech companies during an epidemic" The government partnering with businesses to restrict speech is actually a really bad thing. Thankfully we've pulled back from that now. Trump being corrupt and a garbage human doesn't negate that fact.
  - raw_anon_1111 1y ago
    We have pulled back from that with Trump suing companies who have said things against him and then paying him off - see Paramount, Disney, Facebook, X, and Google. Not to mention the new press corp policy that everything that press says about the Pentagon has to be approved by the government. It was a policy so abhorrent that Fox News even refused to sign. He even threatened to take away ABCs broadcast license because someone criticized a dead racist podcaster. Conservatives all over the US - especially in “the free state of Florida” - are firing public officials who criticize him. (and every time I dare say that Kirk was a racist who said a good “patriot” should bail out the person who best Pelosi’s husband almost to death, I get flagged) https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/11/charlie-kirk-quotes-beliefs https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/11/charlie-kirk...

Spooky23 1y ago

Municipal government does not have any power, obligation nor responsibility to enforce federal law. Lowering themselves to be federal snitches, they reduce compliance with state and local laws which actually impact the public, and create a variety of other problems that hurt the community. Where does it end? Should states investigate purchases that may enable the violation of federal law? You realize that there’s almost no limit to what can be technically constructed to be a federal felony. Why is immigration so special? To conservative thinkers, sitting behind their keyboards in the cushy suburbs, the concept of states’ rights ends with the oppression of minority voting and pillaging of the environment. Anyone, regardless of politics, who is comparing that legal concept to support of the lawlessness the regime is carrying out should really look within.

amanaplanacanal 1y ago

From what I can tell, all Sanctuary City means is that locals will not cooperate with federal law enforcement unless it is legally required. Which seems right to me? States are independent entities with their own laws.

dragonwriter 1y ago
Exactly, sanctuary city/state laws are an application of 10th Amendment reserved powers of the states, and particularly the principle known as the “anti-commandeering doctrine”, hinted at in in dicta concerning hypotheticals regarding the Fugitive Slave Laws in cases shortly before the Civil War and first applied as a basis for judgement by the Supreme Court in New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992). Even where the Constitution grants the federal government authority to make laws and to provide for their enforcement, it generally does not have the power to direct states to use their resources to enforce those laws. Sanctuary laws simply restrict the conditions in which state or local resources will be used to enforce certain federal laws.

raw_anon_1111 1y ago

They just said they won’t be deputized to do something that’s the federal government’s responsibility any more than a city government is responsible for going after federal tax evaders.

cestith 1y ago

The “sanctuary city” label was applied to local governments doing what local governments are supposed to do. There’s nothing in the US Constitution which forces cities, counties, and states to enforce Federal laws. That’s why there are Federal law enforcement agencies, and more of them than most people know. The FBI, CBP, ICE, US Postal Service, USDA, the Park Service, the Secret Service, the US Marshalls, the Marine Fisheries Service, USACID, US Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Office of Odometer Fraud Investigation, Administrative Office of the United States Courts Office of Probation and Pretrial Services, Tennessee Valley Authority Police and Emergency Management, DEA, ATF, all the departmental offices of Inspectors General, and a whole bunch more account for over 130,000 officers with powers of arrest (and usually armed, or will otherwise partner with armed agents from somewhere else). Cities and counties should be enforcing city, county, and state laws. They are not political subdivisions directly of the federal government, and their taxes and resources should be spent on their own jurisdictions.