Jump to content

Federal judge says Sessions can't withhold grant money from sanctuary cities( LINK)


Sweeper13

Recommended Posts

Geez, and this too:

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/09/16/maryland-city-rescinds-vote-that-allowed-illegal-immigrants-to-ballot-in-local-elections.html

 

This will not be good for people who think only legalized citizens should be able to vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Simple solution.

 

Sanctuary cities, place ICE officers at every jail to scene every arrest.

 

Almost forgot, cut the cost of the officers from the funds the city would normally get.

 

Why at every arrest? They'll get deported and not punished for their crimes.

 

No, place them at release processing. They are heading out the door after serving their sentence, oh hello there, please come with us. Now THAT sends a message.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Grant money is grant money, the grant can be terminated, modified or withheld. It is not the cities money until they actually receive it. Why do judges all of the sudden say withholding grant money is wrong, but to withhold grant money to further an agenda, speed limits, drinking age and smoking is perfectly ok?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why at every arrest? They'll get deported and not punished for their crimes.

 

No, place them at release processing. They are heading out the door after serving their sentence, oh hello there, please come with us. Now THAT sends a message.

You screen arrests, that way can have charges already in place, and they can not be released.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Grant money is grant money, the grant can be terminated, modified or withheld. It is not the cities money until they actually receive it. Why do judges all of the sudden say withholding grant money is wrong, but to withhold grant money to further an agenda, speed limits, drinking age and smoking is perfectly ok?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Perhaps they see it as furthering a political agenda. Maybe it's grants already agreed upon rather than future grant eligibility. I have no answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just because some liberal activist "judge" rules one way does NOT mean that it is that way. I expect the ruling to get over ruled up appeal. These are grants= money given to the localities= not owed them. The feds can put just about any strings on them they want. Remember the threat to get highway funds pulled unless they made 55 the speed limit under Carter I believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...