Can You Feel the Vibe Shift?
A YouTuber Did What No Other News Outlet Would Regarding These Somalian Fraud...
A Guest Thought She Could Slide This Gibe at the GOP on CNN....
This CBS News Reporter DID NOT Drink the Kool-Aid Regarding This Story About...
Democrats Hate Police, Love Postal Workers?
Check Out the Photo That the Green Bay Press-Gazette Called One of Their...
The Washington Post Got Massive Backlash for Sob Story About a Trans Athlete
Keir Starmer Celebrated Return of Egyptian Activist Unaware of His History of Violent,...
SNAP Waivers Mean These States Will Ban Junk Food Purchases Starting in 2026
Three Illegal Immigrants Were Just Arrested for a Massive Gift Card Fraud Scheme
Let's Be Honest
Reflection on Year’s End: Infighting at TPUSA?
Trump's Yearly Performance Review
It's Morning Again in America
Frightening CCP Infiltration of the U.S. at All-Time High
Tipsheet

Guess What The Ninth Circuit Had To Say About Sanctuary Cities

AP Photo/Marco Ugarte

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday upheld a lower court decision that ruled said sanctuary cities do not conflict with federal immigration laws. The decision comes after the Trump administration challenged multiple aspects of California's sanctuary city designation, which protects illegal aliens from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. 

Advertisement

From the Times of San Diego:

The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Senate Bill 54, otherwise known as the California Values Act, overriding the federal government’s assertion that it violates the Constitution’s supremacy clause that  states federal law preempts state law when the two are at odds.

The court also upheld two other laws named in the suit, AB 103 and AB 450, which allow the state attorney general to limit expansion of immigration detention facilities and require employers within the state to tell workers when their citizenship may be inspected by federal officials, respectively.

"SB 54 may well frustrate the federal government's immigration enforcement efforts," the court said. "However, whatever the wisdom of the underlying policy adopted by California, that frustration is permissible, because California has the right, pursuant to the anticommandeering rule, to refrain from assisting with federal efforts."

Those who champion California's refusal to cooperate with ICE were happy with the decision.

“This lawsuit against California was an affront to our state’s efforts to strengthen public safety for all while protecting families from the president’s abusive and overreaching deportation force,” San Diego Immigrant Rights Consortium Chair Lilian Serrano told the Times of San Diego.

Advertisement

When the lower court ruled in the state's favor, California's Democratic leaders made it known they refused to cooperate with ICE. 

"CA will not be complicit in the Trump Administration's attack on immigrations, and we won't back down in defending our people and our values," California's former Gov. Jerry Brown (D) said in a statement. "This Administration has intentionally separated families at the border, confined immigrant children to jail cells and blocked every attempt to shine a light on conditions at federal immigration detention facilities. Today's ruling is a victory for our state and a defeat for the Trump Administration's war on our diverse communities."

Here's the full document:

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement