Im not real bright but is this the situation? Chicago is violating federal law by being a sanctuary city. The federal government ( Trump) has in turn said we will cut off the money faucet to you guys because of it , now Rahm is suing them to prevent them from doing that while still violating federal law?

R. Ham.

I'm personally a fan of Federalism and the 10th Amendment. It's nice to see liberals awaken to the concept. Too bad it took them this long to realize government power should be decentralized

Im not real bright but is this the situation? Chicago is violating federal law by being a sanctuary city. The federal government ( Trump) has in turn said we will cut off the money faucet to you guys because of it , now Rahm is suing them to prevent them from doing that while still violating federal law?

Isn't creating a uniform law of naturalization a power expressly granted to the federal government by the constitution? And don't they then have the implied power to enforce said uniform law and exact its uniformity?

I like a system of dual federalism as well, but this is not an issue really up for debate. The feds set the immigration tune that the states all dance to.

I don't understand how you can sue for suffering the consequences of breaking the law. I guess it's like guy who breaks into a store, hurts himself in the process of ripping the place off, then sues the owner of the store.

in terms of naturalization and citizenship, yes.

In terms of using your own local law enforcements and resources for rounding up and arresting those in violation of those laws, no

Cities cannot grant citizenship, but they also cannot be compelled to check visa status. The City of Chicago will likely win this case.

And the person suing, in those cases, wins most of the time.

in terms of naturalization and citizenship, yes.

In terms of using your own local law enforcements and resources for rounding up and arresting those in violation of those laws, no

Cities cannot grant citizenship, but they also cannot be compelled to check visa status. The City of Chicago will likely win this case.

Can they ignore any federal law?

The Tenth Amendment is a great part of our Constitution and it is an amendment that is all too seldom recognized.

The Tenth Amendment says in many cases that they can.

Really they aren't ignoring the law, but rather they are not using their city resources to enforce the law. If they forbid ICE from working in the city, then yes they are violating Federal law, but choosing not to perform ICE's duties for them is perfectly legal.

The Tenth Amendment is a great part of our Constitution and it is an amendment that is all too seldom recognized. In the era of Trump, many are starting to remember that it exists.

Can states ignore the Civil Right Act? Or by decree, not enforce it when its protections are invoked?

They can't ignore it because the 14th Amendment. If the CRA were ever challenged in court, it would be ruled Constitutional under that Amendment

This is quite the ideological conundrum for MANY.

What about Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution makes laws deriving their authority from its provisions able to be ignored by the states?

but they are refusing to work with ICe by not turning over people on the deportation list

I believe the case law is already settled when Arizona got its butt kicked that immigration is the purvue of the Feds. But I am with Ogie in that they can't cram that down the locals' throat. The Feds way of "forcing" states and cities to do what they want is with funding dollars.