Sanctuary Cities Could See Their Transportation Projects Caught In The Crossfire
There are penalties for violating federal law on a subject that the federal government is tasked with per the Constitution
(Politico) A tunnel under New York’s Hudson River may be imperiled. In Los Angeles, millions of dollars could be at stake for port improvements. And other communities’ hopes for major transportation projects could be caught in the crossfire as President Donald Trump threatens to strip federal funding from “sanctuary cities” that defy his immigration policies.
Considering that Boston, New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Los Angeles and Washington, D.C., have all declared themselves sanctuaries for undocumented immigrants, Trump’s reprisals could end up canceling or delaying major infrastructure projects in some of the nation’s most congested areas — even as the administration touts a $1 trillion proposal to rebuild the United States’ roads, railroads, bridges and airports.
Trump issued an executive order last month that declares a “policy” of blocking federal funds for cities, states and other jurisdictions that refuse to provide information and assistance to federal immigration authorities. That puts potentially hundreds of millions of dollars on the chopping block, and transportation advocates say the damage could extend far beyond Trump’s intended targets.
“Wouldn’t punishing a city with a loss of transit funding have deleterious effects on an entire region?” asked Steve Davis, communications director for the advocacy group Transportation for America. “D.C. for example — if the District lost transportation funding, wouldn’t Prince William or other outlying counties pay part of the price too in congestion, lost productivity and economic turmoil?”
There’s an easy solution to this: stop being sanctuary cities. Stop sheltering those who are unlawfully present in the country. Cooperate with federal authorities when it comes to illegal aliens. Leftists claim to love the federal government, yet, when federal law goes against their predilection for illegal aliens, even those who are stone cold felons such as child molestation, they want to defy the federal government. The Constitution gives the Congress the
power duty to protect our borders.
Many liberal cities and counties have recently changed their tune, such as Miami. Whether they’ve only rescinded their policies in name only and will continue the actual practices remains to be seen. Yet, this is the right path. The rest should think long on whether they should continue protecting illegal aliens who usually end up in police stations because they’ve broken the law.
Nor is it out of bounds for a president and/or Congress to threaten to withhold funding. They do it all the time. They’ve done it on highway funding, especially regarding things like lowering the speed limit to 55, legal drinking age, and the use of seat belts.
Interestingly, Team Obama threatened to withhold funding to schools and even North Carolina if they didn’t allow men who felt they were women to use girls bathrooms, showers, and locker rooms. Where was the media outrage over this strong-arm tactic which would violate the privacy and sanctity of women and girls? Those threats were outside the norm, and not in line with the Constitution. Withholding funding for cities and counties that refuse to obey Constitutional federal law is well within the purview of the federal government.