Tags

, , , , , ,

Hard cases make bad law. That’s a legal maxim. It’s true but, too often, it’s just the way it is.

President Trump has threatened to cut off federal brides funding to sanctuary cities across the country. These cities willingly aid and abet criminal illegal invaders. I had recommended prosecuting the officials involved for felonies. Trump thinks the purse is enough. And he’s probably right.

Still, for now, the State of California is at least talking about a novel response – cutting off revenues from the state to Washington.

Officials are looking for money that flows through Sacramento to the federal government that could be used to offset the potential loss of billions of dollars’ worth of federal funds if President Trump makes good on his threat to punish cities and states that don’t cooperate with federal agents’ requests to turn over undocumented immigrants, a senior government source in Sacramento said.

The federal funds pay for a variety of state and local programs from law enforcement to homeless shelters.

“California could very well become an organized non-payer,” said Willie Brown, Jr, a former speaker of the state Assembly in an interview recorded Friday for KPIX 5’s Sunday morning news. “They could recommend non-compliance with the federal tax code.”

California is among a handful of so-called “donor states,” which pay more in taxes to the federal Treasury than they receive in government funding.

I like this part. Originally the little central government had no power to raise its own money. Accordingly, if it wanted a budget, it had to beg the several states for funds. They were free to say “no” and they sometimes did. This helped keep the central cabal small and weak. Then we foolishly adopted the Constitution and, later, the 16th Amendment.

I’m not sure how this would work. Perhaps California will collect federal taxes and hold on to them. My guess is they would not allow the people who earn the money to keep it. Of course, if they did “recommend non-compliance” as the story suggests, they would be advocating felonies. Since this all started because of other felonies, that kind of makes sense.

This would also set a great precedent. People in CA could stop paying state taxes in similar fashion. They could tell Sacramento to take their “high capacity” magazine ban and shove it. I doubt this has occurred to minds in Sacramento.

And then there’s the growing movement for CA to secede from the Union. That I fully support – not only as a Southerner and secession rights person but as one of millions who already regard CA as another world (might as well be another country).

I don’t know what California’s admittance paperwork said but there is nothing in the Constitution to suggest the Union is anything but voluntary. 600,000 dead to the contrary is not a legal precedent, just mass homicide.

Why is this a hard case? It’s because of the root issues. The loonies in CA only discovered states right in their suicidal bid to import and secure terrorists and criminals in their cities. A more idiotic cause could not be contrived.

If they go, I wish them well. I also recommend Trump extend his wall up and around California. The Communist Caliphate wouldn’t last two years before they would attempt to break back in.