Like Countable?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 1885

Should Sanctuary Cities That Don't Enforce Immigration Law Lose Federal Funding?

Argument in favor

Sanctuary cities are actively subverting the federal government’s efforts to enforce immigration law. As such, they shouldn’t be eligible for federal funding. As long as sanctuary cities refuse to help enforce federal immigration law, they shouldn’t be allowed to continue receiving federal funding.

TexasTRex's Opinion
···
06/14/2019
Harboring criminals should require loss of federal funding. The government is more than happy to take away money from its citizens for other reasons. A direct violation of the law shouldn’t be any different. Sorry it hurts the local citizens, but they need to stand up to their elected officials and tell them to stop it if they don’t like it. There are consequences to choices.
Like (94)
Follow
Share
JustJeeps's Opinion
···
06/14/2019
Aiding and abetting a Felon is a crime. If Democrats want to prosecute everyone to prove “No one is above the law”, then that can’t mean: “No one is above the laws WE CHOOSE TO Enforce.” We are either a country that enforces our laws or we are not.
Like (66)
Follow
Share
Sterling's Opinion
···
06/14/2019
By declaring as a sanctuary city they have decided that the laws of the federal government do not apply to them. Thee is nothing wrong with doing that but with that decision there should be consequences including a loss if funds from the entity whose laws they have decided to snub.
Like (51)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

It may not be constitutional for Congress to enact this bill, as the Supreme Court has previously found it unconstitutional for Congress to withhold federal funding from states and localities in retaliation for their refusal to implement a federal program.

Kodiwodi's Opinion
···
06/14/2019
This has been asked and answered so many times now. No. If you remove federal funding from Sanctuary Cities and States because they are doing what they feel is morally and ethically correct, than you must remove funding from other states presenting laws on what they feel is morally and ethically correct. It would also open up the whole taxation without representation issue as well and would they need to pay taxes to the Feds. Gosh it just sucks not to be equally bigoted doesn’t it? Jason, you mean like Washington DC? I agree Lance. Then the Feds whose responsibly it is to enforce immigration without the military or local police should lose these sanctuaries taxes. Wonder what the red states will do without the blue states taxes?
Like (173)
Follow
Share
Deirdre 's Opinion
···
06/14/2019
Instead of hurting people why don’t you all try helping people
Like (76)
Follow
Share
Robert's Opinion
···
06/14/2019
Mean spirited and vindictive I have no use for this kind of democracy
Like (72)
Follow
Share

bill Progress


  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The senate has not voted
  • The house has not voted
      house Committees
      Committee on the Judiciary
      Immigration and Citizenship
    IntroducedMarch 26th, 2019
    Harboring criminals should require loss of federal funding. The government is more than happy to take away money from its citizens for other reasons. A direct violation of the law shouldn’t be any different. Sorry it hurts the local citizens, but they need to stand up to their elected officials and tell them to stop it if they don’t like it. There are consequences to choices.
    Like (94)
    Follow
    Share
    This has been asked and answered so many times now. No. If you remove federal funding from Sanctuary Cities and States because they are doing what they feel is morally and ethically correct, than you must remove funding from other states presenting laws on what they feel is morally and ethically correct. It would also open up the whole taxation without representation issue as well and would they need to pay taxes to the Feds. Gosh it just sucks not to be equally bigoted doesn’t it? Jason, you mean like Washington DC? I agree Lance. Then the Feds whose responsibly it is to enforce immigration without the military or local police should lose these sanctuaries taxes. Wonder what the red states will do without the blue states taxes?
    Like (173)
    Follow
    Share
    Instead of hurting people why don’t you all try helping people
    Like (76)
    Follow
    Share
    Mean spirited and vindictive I have no use for this kind of democracy
    Like (72)
    Follow
    Share
    Aiding and abetting a Felon is a crime. If Democrats want to prosecute everyone to prove “No one is above the law”, then that can’t mean: “No one is above the laws WE CHOOSE TO Enforce.” We are either a country that enforces our laws or we are not.
    Like (66)
    Follow
    Share
    By declaring as a sanctuary city they have decided that the laws of the federal government do not apply to them. Thee is nothing wrong with doing that but with that decision there should be consequences including a loss if funds from the entity whose laws they have decided to snub.
    Like (51)
    Follow
    Share
    👍🏻H.R.1885 AKA “No Federal Funding to Benefit Sanctuary Cities Act”👍🏻 I strongly recommend and support passage of House Bill H.R. 1885 AKA the “No Federal Funding to Benefit Sanctuary Cities Act” which would prohibit a sanctuary jurisdiction from receiving federal financial assistance. It’d also protect state or political subdivisions that comply with a detainer by deeming them to be agents of the Dept. of Homeland Security (DHS) authorized to take actions to comply with the detainer. Sanctuary cities are actively subverting the federal government’s efforts to enforce immigration law. As such, they shouldn’t be eligible for federal funding. As long as sanctuary cities refuse to help enforce federal immigration law, they shouldn’t be allowed to continue receiving federal funding. SneakyPete..... 👍🏻👍🏻HR-1885👍🏻👍🏻. 6.14.19.....
    Like (48)
    Follow
    Share
    Absolutely! You can’t choose which laws to enforce. If you can’t enforce immigration laws, you shouldn’t get funding to police these people. This additional funding needs to come from the state. This isn’t about being mean or selfish. This is about keeping our own people safe and enforcing laws that are in the books. Hold your representatives accountable!
    Like (43)
    Follow
    Share
    Again. This is an individual States Rights question. States rights often don’t match those of the fed gov. Example: Marijuana. Besides. Immigration under Trump is Nazis reborn. THAT IN ITSELF IS A REASON TO RESIST IT
    Like (40)
    Follow
    Share
    Being a humanitarian should not be penalized.
    Like (37)
    Follow
    Share
    Per the president, we can pick and chose what laws we want to obey. What laws we want to bend into a pretzel and who to listen to, so yes, sanctuary cities should not lose any funding for being decent and humane.
    Like (33)
    Follow
    Share
    You don’t punish the poor and middle class over politics. It’s un-Republican to erode state rights.
    Like (32)
    Follow
    Share
    Immigration is a federal responsibility. Cities, Counties, and States can’t issue papers or visas. Don’t blame other because the feds can’t get their shit together to do their job. Cities and states don’t have the funds to do the job for the feds. Do your own damn work.
    Like (30)
    Follow
    Share
    Yes they need to lose all Federal funding if they refuse to follow Federal law they need to lose all fund funds
    Like (29)
    Follow
    Share
    Break federal law, get federal money (taxpayer [like me] money) I think not. These cities and states need to redo their priorities hard working citizens or illegals. They shouldn’t have it both ways. It’s like telling law abiding people we can break laws but you can’t
    Like (25)
    Follow
    Share
    Punish a City or State because they have humanitarian values? There is such a thing as a State's right to disagree with Federal directives- particularly since these efforts are long term and will surely outlast the current administration. Are they supposed to suddenly stop what they are doing because a numb nuts administration finagled themselves into office? It has been an accepted practice and that shouldn't have to change every time there is an election. What is next? Withdraw federal funding from any district that did not vote Republican?
    Like (23)
    Follow
    Share
    Sanctuary cities should not lose federal funding for not enforcing immigration laws. Rather they should have INCREASED FUNDING for caring for immigrants in humane facilities with empathy and support rather than in cages and crowded inhumane conditions where they may die.
    Like (22)
    Follow
    Share
    They’re literally breaking federal laws, we shouldn’t be encouraging that.
    Like (22)
    Follow
    Share
    Of course! The legality of sanctuary cities is questionable in the first place, despite being a state’s separate “right”. Unless these sanctuary cities are committed to upholding current immigration laws and providing assistance to state and federal agencies, federal funding should be held. If their mantra, “no one is above the law” is what they truly believe and must be applicable to POTUS, ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS that take sanctuary in these cities surely must be held to that same belief. Get a grip legislators!! I will not vote for flip floppers that politicize specific issues for their personal agendas. Period. ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS are here ILLEGALLY. They aren’t undocumented, they aren’t here accidentally, they are here because they did not go through proper channels no matter how cumbersome the laws are. Fix what is broken first. Humanitarian relief should be centered on correcting the laws that prevent immigration to our country legally. Instead of making it appear that those who support a wall and immigration reform out to be monsters, why not stand behind the “humanitarian” cause and get this fixed? Come on people! Use your heads!!!
    Like (21)
    Follow
    Share
    Absolutely - I don’t want my federal tax dollars going to places where they blatantly disregard the law.
    Like (20)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE