Jeff Sessions Calls Out California’s Immigration Defiance

A young man asked me, yesterday, “I wanted to ask you a constitutional question regarding Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ ability to sue California for protecting illegals with sanctuary status.”

I responded, “It begins with a question about authority.”

Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution reads, “The Congress shall have Power … To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.”

The clause gives the federal Congress the authority to make laws regarding naturalization.  The States are required to abide by those laws.  That power, however, is regarding immigrants after they’ve arrived, and have decided to seek U.S. Citizenship.

Article I, Section 9 of the United States Constitution reads, “The Migration … of such persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight.”

The clause gives the federal Congress the authority to make laws regarding “migration” into the country, with specific attention to allowing Congress to “prohibit” any person as they deem necessary from entering the country.

Article VI of the U.S. Constitution reads, “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

The clause states that the Constitution, and any laws by the federal government which were made in pursuance of the Constitution (as we recognize is indeed the case regarding immigration law and Article I, Section 9), and all treaties, are the supreme law of the land, and the States may not make any law contrary.  The judges are required to abide by this clause in their rulings.  Since immigration law is a federal authority, immigration laws that are contrary to federal immigration law are unconstitutional (illegal).

Article IV, Section 4 of the United States Constitution requires the federal government to protect the States against invasion,

The clause is not merely a suggestion, but a definitive requirement that the federal government takes all steps to protect the States from any unwanted encroachment, therefore providing constitutional authority for Trump’s wall.

Article II, Section 3 provides that the President “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”

The Clause reminds us that as the Chief Executive, it is the job of the President of the United States to make sure the laws of the United States are executed, and he accomplishes the task through his departments, agencies, and officials.

U.S. Code, sections 1324 and 1325 considers it a felony to conceal, harbor, or shelter illegal aliens. Failing to report illegal aliens also violates the Immigration and Naturalization Act sections 274 and 275. U.S. Code and the Immigration and Naturalization Act also considers entry into the United States without inspection to be a misdemeanor, and repeated illegal entry is a felony.

Any and all politicians in California, such as Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf, who have tipped-off illegal aliens regarding ICE’s impending raids, or have participated in making law defying the authority of the United States Government on the immigration issue, are guilty of breaking U.S. Law, and therefore it is appropriate for the United States Government to prosecute these individuals, and the State of California, for their illegal activity.

As the senior federal law enforcement official in the United States Government Jeff Sessions not only has the authority, but the obligation, to take action to make sure California complies with federal law regarding immigration.

California’s Governor, Jerry Brown called Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ trip to California a political stunt and his description of California’s laws a lie.

“Like so many in the Trump administration, this attorney general has no regard for the truth,” Brown told reporters, adding that the laws were crafted with input and support from California police chiefs. “This is basically going to war against the State of California.”

Brown in October signed into law a bill that prevents police from inquiring about immigration status and curtails law enforcement cooperation with immigration officers.

The lawsuit filed by Sessions against California addresses three laws passed last year with the specific intent to protect illegal aliens in California.  Sessions has rightly argued that the California laws violate the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution and interfere with federal immigration enforcement.

“This is basically going to war against the State of California, the engine of the American economy,” Brown said. “It’s not wise, it’s not right and it will not stand.”

Brown also has called the Trump administration’s attempt to execute immigration law “a reign of terror.”

Sessions stated that the California Democrats are taking the actions of “radical extremists.”

State Senate President Pro-Tem, and candidate for U.S. Senator, Kevin De León said he is directing former U.S. Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., under contract to provide legal advice to the State Senate, to help formulate a response to submit in court. On a conference call with reporters, Holder said legal precedent makes clear that the federal government cannot insist that a State use its resources to enforce federal immigration law.

There is no case law, or constitutional authority, that permits a State to use its resources to interfere with federal agencies, either.  While the County Sheriff must technically approve federal operation within his county, that provision exists to guard against the federal government intruding and acting outside the provisions of the U.S. Constitution, not regarding the execution of constitutionally sound federal law.

“From my perspective, the Trump administration’s lawsuit is really a political and unconstitutional attack on the State of California’s well-established rights under our system of government,” Holder said.

It is amazing to me how the Democrats ignore the concept of States’ Rights on issues where the States have the authority and the federal government has none (abortion, marriage), yet scream States’ Rights when the authority belongs to the federal government (immigration).

The three laws administration officials seek to challenge make it a crime for business owners to voluntarily help federal agents find and detain undocumented workers, prohibit local law enforcement from alerting immigration agents when detainees are released from custody and create a state inspection program for federal immigration detention centers.

California’s State Attorney General Xavier Becerra has pledged to defend the measures in court, saying they work in concert with federal laws. “Our teams work together to go after drug dealers, to combat gang violence, to take down sex-trafficking rings, and we have no intention of changing that,” he said.

In his speech to more than 100 police chiefs, sheriffs and other law enforcement officers, Sessions argued that the Trump administration did not reject immigration, but said the U.S. should not reward those who unlawfully enter the country with benefits, such as legal status, food stamps and work permits.

“We are going to fight these irrational, unfair and unconstitutional policies that have been imposed on you and our federal officers,” Sessions said as he finished his speech to the California Peace Officers Association, and some officers stood in ovation. “You can be certain about this: We have your back, and you have our thanks.”

As the group welcomed Sessions with applause, a statewide coalition of immigrant rights groups gathered outside to protest his arrival.

Donald Trump will visit California next week.  Trump plans to visit the US-Mexico border to look at border wall prototypes in the San Diego area.  He has been looking to schedule a trip to the border “for a while,” one source said. Trump has not visited California since he was sworn into office as President of the United States.

— Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary