You Want to Be a Sanctuary?

By the time this is published, it is not inconceivable that the State of California, long known accurately as the "land of fruits and nuts", will have completed passage of a law designating itself a "sanctuary state", and celebrating the wonderful attributes of inclusion, diversity and ... well, murder.

Before the desk of the governor, Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown (D, of course), is such a bill, and it is assumed that he will sign it.  At that point, the State of California will cease to cooperate with Federal laws regarding the processing of criminal illegal aliens in the state, releasing them to walk among its citizens without risk of the state notifying Federal immigration officers that they're holding criminal aliens before they are released.

The state will have declared itself a "welcoming" place to people who are here illegally and have committed crimes -- it is critical to mention that, because we're not talking about being "welcoming" and "inclusive" as much as we are talking about the treatment of a certain class of criminals.  We would expect, in the sense of normal order, that state and local law enforcement who are obligated by Federal law to hold such criminals for processing by the USA, would do just that.

If anything, it would mean less work for state and local officials, by getting the feds to deport criminal aliens who are likely to come back and repeat their crimes if they're left in the state and community.

Well, California, or at least its elected legislature and governor, apparently don't really care so much about those citizens and the victims of the crimes against them, as they do about the presumed votes they think they'll gain if those illegals and their families somehow get legalized -- and California decides who can vote in California state and local elections, remember.

So here goes.

Every political statement -- and this surely is one -- runs the risk of its victims acting in their own interest, which is why businesses and jobs are already leaving California, even before some minimum-wage hikes in the state forced more of them out.  People afraid of having criminal aliens become a "protected class" are leaving as well.

But the real slap in the face was to the citizens of the USA and to the Federal government, which as we know is led by President Donald Trump.  There are many things we can say about President Trump, and one of them is that he fights back when offended.  And this is a directed offense against him, folks.

I think that the president should take California at its word.  "You want to be welcoming, I'll show you welcoming.  You want to protect criminals, well, let's see how you like this ..."

California does not want the USA to deport anyone, even criminals.  So OK, we won't deport them, we'll send them to California.  Dump them in downtown San Francisco.  Maybe arm them, since the state appears to think they're afraid of something, and they need protection.  In fact, if the state is so welcoming to criminals, maybe the next ten Federal prisons should be built in California, too.

There are some serious dollars spent on the military in California as well.  San Diego is practically the mainland home of the Navy in the Pacific, and that isn't going to change anytime.  A bit north of that is Camp Pendleton, one of three Marine Expeditionary Force locations in the world.  There are Air Force bases and Army installations as well.

But unlike the State of California, the Federal government actually is concerned about criminal aliens running free without ICE agents being notified.  And we have to protect our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines.  Period.

So one urgent step would be for the President and Secretary of Defense to issue executive orders barring servicemen stationed in California from leaving base.  Or Congress could also pass a law exempting uniformed servicemen from sales taxes in "any state which by statute fails to cooperate with immigration enforcement."  The servicemen can go off-base and spend in the local economy, but the state gets no tax revenue.  Or the servicemen can be kept on base, but a special retail area can develop -- a Camp Pendleton Walmart, for example, would be successful -- something like that.

Failure to enforce immigration law is going to mean that ICE has to pick up the slack, right?  Well, someone has to pay for that, and it might as well come out of the aid checks that go to the California treasury for whatever we send money to them for.  A state decides not to follow Federal law, which costs the taxpayer in the other 49 states to pay for ICE to staff up higher.  It only makes sense that the cost has to be made up, and by docking California, that makes it all right with the other taxpayers.

Of course, eventually these actions are going to cost the state as much as losing innocent citizens to illegal criminal aliens has, and they'll wake up.  Hopefully, "wake up" means that they'll stop electing Democrats to their legislatures, although somehow the citizens haven't awakened and stopped electing Democrats in death traps like Chicago, Baltimore, Washington, Los Angeles ... you get the idea.

Either way, here is the point.  You want to make a political point, you have to be prepared to face the consequences.  You want to say how "inclusive" you are, especially of criminals, you have to consider being voted out of office.  You want to stop cooperating with the Federal government to enforce the laws that were passed by the representatives of all 50 states, well, that government has options as well.

It's a two-way street, of course.  The next Democrat president could try to justify comparable actions against, say, a conservative mountain-west state.  And let's face it, we do believe in Federalism and the rights of states.  But those rights do stop at the "powers delegated" in the Constitution, and our borders and their enforcement are the province not of Moonbeam Brown and the oddballs in the California legislature, but of the government of the United States of America.

If California wants to secede, now, that's something I can get behind.  Unlike the War Between the States, I imagine that such secession would be met not by an army dispatched to bring them back in, but by a thrilling, patriotic "Bon voyage!"

I'll send a bouquet.

Copyright 2017 by Robert Sutton
Like what you read here?  There's a new post from Bob at www.uberthoughtsUSA.com at 10am Eastern time, every weekday, giving new meaning to "prolific essayist."  Appearance, advertising, sponsorship and interview inquiries cheerfully welcomed at bsutton@alum.mit.edu or on Twitter at @rmosutton.