Politics: The White House has vowed to veto a Senate bill cracking down on sanctuary cities in the name of, incredibly, enforcing immigration law. How does succoring lawbreakers indicate seriousness about the rule of law?
The Stop Sanctuary Policies And Protect Americans Act (S. 2146) is a common-sense immigration bill from the Senate sponsored by David Vitter, a Louisiana Republican.
Illegal immigrant Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, at
his arraignment, admitted to killing Kate Steinle on
a San Francisco pier in July. AP
The measure is a natural outcome of the immigration debate that started in earnest this summer when Donald Trump criticized unchecked illegal immigration and then 32-year-old Kate Steinle was murdered in broad daylight on a San Francisco tourist pier by Francisco Sanchez, a five-times-deported alien felon who said he was there thanks to the city's sanctuary laws.
Steinle's death called attention to the fact that sanctuary laws — now in place in 340 jurisdictions, according to the Center for Immigration Studies — are as illegal as Sanchez.
|LINK: Number of Sanctuary Cities Grows to 340|
City ordinances do not supercede federal laws, not anywhere in the country or in any other context. But the Obama administration has made an exception for this illegal phenomenon because he believes that each illegal represents a potential Democratic vote. So never mind the federal law that he's sworn to uphold.
The bill destined for the president's wastebasket addresses the problem by cutting off federal funds to cities that actively obstruct federal immigration law. More specifically, the bill would deny funds for three programs and community development block grants to jurisdictions that shelter illegals from federal lawmen
All in all, pretty mild stuff, given that the city officials involved could and should be arrested as lawbreakers. But to hear the White House talk, you'd think that the problem was not in the cities' nullification of federal law but the cutoff of cash for bureaucrats to spend.
Late Tuesday, Senate Democrats blocked the Vitter bill on a near-party-line vote, with Minority Leader Harry Reid calling it "vile." What's really vile, however, is the White House's claim that the bill will actually obstruct immigration enforcement.Read the rest of this IBD editorial HERE.
If you like what you see, please "Like" us on Facebook either here or here. Please follow us on Twitter here.