By Douglas V. Gibbs
Governor J.B. Pritzker’s new Illinois law shielding illegal aliens from federal immigration enforcement has triggered constitutional alarm bells, with DHS warning it violates the Supremacy Clause of Article VI in the U.S. Constitution.
Governor Pritzker’s signing of HB 1312, a bill barring Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from making arrests in or near courthouses, hospitals, daycares, and university campuses, has ignited a firestorm of legal and constitutional criticism. The law also allows residents to sue federal agents for alleged civil rights violations, a move critics say is designed to obstruct lawful federal immigration enforcement.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has responded forcefully, warning that the law directly contradicts federal immigration statutes and violates the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Article VI, Paragraph 2 states, “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof…shall be the supreme Law of the Land…any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”
This clause makes clear that constitutionally authorized federal law supersedes state law. Immigration law, being a federal prerogative authorized by Article I, Section 8 and Article I, Section 9 cannot be nullified or obstructed by state legislation. Article II instructs the President of the United States to “faithfully execute the laws of the Union,” and Article I, Section 8 grants the use of the militia (National Guard) to execute the laws of the United States. Therefore, the State of Illinois has no constitutional allowance to legislate against federal immigration law, nor the execution of immigration law. As a result, DHS officials have accused Pritzker of violating his oath of office, which requires him to support the Constitution of the United States – which includes the Supremacy Clause.
Pritzker’s rhetoric at the bill signing ceremony was equally provocative, framing the law as a moral stand against President Trump, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, and Border Chief Gregory Bovino. “The best of us are standing up to the worst of them,” Pritzker declared, casting federal immigration enforcement as a threat to compassion and justice.
But critics argue that this is not about compassion. It’s about their partisan battle against President Trump, and desire to dismantle American sovereignty. Instead, progressives favor a vision of global governance with porous borders and diminished national identity. This worldview echoes the ideological aims of communism and the utopian borderless society imagined in John Lennon’s “Imagine.”
The constitutional implications are profound. If states can selectively nullify federal law based on ideological disagreement, the rule of law collapses into a patchwork of partisan defiance. Sanctuary policies, like Illinois’ new law, do not merely challenge immigration enforcement, they challenge the very structure of federalism.
Regardless of partisan political party viewpoints, the U.S. Constitution has the final say over political meanderings. The Supremacy Clause exists to prevent precisely this kind of fragmentation, ensuring that constitutional federal law remains the backbone of preserving and protecting the union. There is, after all, a separation of powers between federal and state constitutional authorities. When state leaders defy that line in the sand, they not only undermine immigration enforcement, they undermine the Republic itself and the importance of the role of the federal government as well.
— Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
