With the election of Donald Trump, the federal government and both local and educational authorities are on a collision course over immigration policies. Many states and cities have reaffirmed that they will oppose any deportation efforts, including another recent chest-pounding interview by Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker. It is likely that the federal government will squeeze federal funding for sanctuary states and cities, though such efforts can trigger “commandeering” and other legal challenges. Universities may be in a more precarious position, but some like the Los Rios Community College District in California are doubling down on plans to oppose any federal enforcement efforts.
Various university and college presidents have reaffirmed their support for undocumented students and staff, including most recently Fordham University President Tania Tetlow. However, the Los Rios Community College District seems to have laid out a more concrete plan to oppose federal enforcement, a plan that was referenced in a January 28 email.
The District covers American River College, Cosumnes River College, Folsom Lake College, and Sacramento City College.
The email states that “[t]here have been reports all over the country of increased immigration raids in association with Executive Orders tied to immigration enforcement.” It seeks to address the “[f]ear … widespread throughout the undocumented and ally communities about their safety and the safety of their families and loved ones.”
Just after Trump’s election, Los Rios published a “Compact in Support of Undocumented and DACA Students and Employees,” including the possible concealment of immigration status.
Here are the eight commitments:
Los Rios will do everything in its power to fight for the rights of our immigrant and undocumented students and employees and will always do everything possible to uphold the values of our institutions.
Los Rios stands with state and local leaders who have pledged to do everything possible to defend the rights and protections of immigrant and undocumented Californians.
Los Rios commits to advocating for a permanent legislative solution to the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and a pathway to citizenship for our immigrant communities.
Los Rios will immediately provide additional resources to our Undocumented Resource Centers.
The Los Rios Police reaffirms its commitment to not participate in immigration-related activities, including arresting and/or detaining students, consistent with organizational values and state law.
Los Rios will protect students’ rights and confidentiality and will not share the immigration status of students or employees.
Los Rios, its colleges, and partners will do a full review of internal policies and regulations to ensure that we are doing everything possible to protect the rights of students and employees.
The Los Rios Colleges Foundation will create Dream Center Funds with resources for each college, administered by the Undocumented Resource Center on each campus. The Foundation will encourage other community members, employees, and private and corporate funders to give support to undocumented students to help remove critical barriers to their success, such as paying for DACA renewal fees, legal fees, purchasing laptops, and additional resources.
Number 6 is particularly interesting in promising an active role to conceal or withhold immigration status information.
We have been down this road before. Schools previously fought this battle over efforts to bar military recruiters. While I have been a vocal supporter of gay rights on many fronts, I was one of those who opposed the litigation that my law school joined. At the time, I stated that it was not only a clear loser on the law but also represented a type of hypocrisy: We insist that we cannot allow discrimination, but if money is at stake, we will allow it.
In Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights, Inc., 547 U.S. 47 (2006), the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the federal government, under the Solomon Amendment, could constitutionally withhold funding from universities if they barred military recruiters from interviewing students. The Solomon Amendment denied federal funding to an institution of higher education that “has a policy or practice … that either prohibits, or in effect prevents” the military “from gaining access to campuses, or access to students … on campuses, for purposes of military recruiting in a manner that is at least equal in quality and scope to the access to campuses and to students that is provided to any other employer.” 10 U. S. C. A. §983(b) (Supp. 2005).
It is easier to limit funds for universities, but it can still raise constitutional problems from free speech to associational rights.
In Rumsfeld v. FAIR, Chief Justice John Roberts noted that such laws could run afoul of the unconstitutional conditions doctrine “if Congress could not directly require universities to provide military recruiters equal access to their students.” He then added:
“This case does not require us to determine when a condition placed on university funding goes beyond the ‘reasonable’ choice offered in Grove City and becomes an unconstitutional condition. It is clear that a funding condition cannot be unconstitutional if it could be constitutionally imposed directly. See Speiser v. Randall, 357 U. S. 513, 526 (1958). Because the First Amendment would not prevent Congress from directly imposing the Solomon Amendment’s access requirement, the statute does not place an unconstitutional condition on the receipt of federal funds.
The Solomon Amendment neither limits what law schools may say nor requires them to say anything. Law schools remain free under the statute to express whatever views they may have on the military’s congressionally mandated employment policy, all the while retaining eligibility for federal funds. See Tr. of Oral Arg. 25 (Solicitor General acknowledging that law schools “could put signs on the bulletin board next to the door, they could engage in speech, they could help organize student protests”). As a general matter, the Solomon Amendment regulates conduct, not speech. It affects what law schools must do—afford equal access to military recruiters—not what they may or may not say.”
The coming challenges could raise the question left open in Rumsfeld v. FAIR. However, the question is whether universities, particularly state institutions, want to go down this road of confrontation rather than cooperation.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
long past the time to END federal funding and loan backing to colleges, cities, states and non-profits
also to ban public unions
Democrats should NOT be REWARDED for FAILURE
Stupid Legal Question: Given that entering the US other than through an approved port of entry and going through the required process is itself a crime, and harboring illegal aliens an offense, under 8 U.S.C. Sections 1324 and 1325, Aliens and Nationality, cross-referenced with 18 U.S.C., Crimes and Criminal Procedure, could not these schools, as entities or certainly any involved administrators, teachers or staff, be subject to prosecution under Section 1324 and/or an accessory theory? Particulary given the repeated assertions of “the rule of law,” we must remember that the aliens are allowed any and all rights they have under the Constitution, federal statutes and regulations, see https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C18-8-7-2/ALDE_00001262; “no one is above the law” – nor below it.
And, while the subject individuals are indeed “undocumented immigrants,” they are also illegal aliens, despite “correcting” someone who uses that phrase: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2025/01/27/msnbcs_alex_witt_corrects_reporter_we_call_them_undocumented.html. The Constitution and United States Code use The A-Word.
RussAmGirl: I’m in a hurry now, but a worthwhile question from you. I quickly want to note the difference between “aiding and abetting” and simply refusing to cooperate or assist the federal government in its functions.
(lgbmiel will appreciate my inclusion of this), from Madison, in Federalist #46:
“Should an unwarrantable measure of the federal government be unpopular in particular States, which would seldom fail to be the case, or even a warrantable measure be so, which may sometimes be the case, the means of opposition to it are powerful and at hand. The disquietude of the people; their repugnance and, perhaps refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union, the frowns of the executive magistracy of the State; the embarrassment created by legislative devices, which would often be added on such occasions, would oppose, in any State, very serious impediments; and were the sentiments of several adjoining States happen to be in Union, would present obstructions which the federal government would hardly be willing to encounter.” Thus, the emphasis and acceptance of the right for schools, under speech protections, to be critical of the fed’s policy or law. And this is what JT is focusing on.
Rather than the Rumsfield case, I find the Sebelius case (Independent Business v. Sebelius, 2012, regarding Obama’s ACA) much more informative/instructive in this matter. In that case, SCOTUS essentially denied Congressional right to withhold existing funds to states if they did not expand Medicaid to a broader class of recipients.
The case importantly distinguished between threatening to withhold existing funds, and threatening to withhold enhanced/broader funding to States that would not accept the new conditions. But its discussion of state sovereignty and separation of sovereigns is helpful.
(This is the case that I remember being infamously known for CJ Roberts declaring the ACA’s individual mandate penalty as a “tax,” remember that one?) ( did not attach a link because reading the divided case, a 5-4 decision, would take half your day at least, but summaries are also available.)
Finally, for those of us not involved, I believe it is important to know the “conditions” attached to the original funding (note the discussion in Sebelius regarding the government’s argument that its contract included a clause regarding its rights to alter or amend….)
(from lin)
Breaking News:
Helo pilot was trans woman, angry that Hegseth is in charge. Purposely ignored air traffic instructions and flight plan and flew into the passenger plane.
I’m not seeing that in any of the news feeds. Could you provide a link?
Citation?
Since I don’t reply to ‘anonymous’ I’m answering your comment.
I believe it was an attempt at a joke.
There is something seriously wrong with him.
Won’t believe anything like this until we get the BB recordings
More, on the DEI crap at the FAA. Maybe it wasn’t a DEI hire that screwed up. Maybe it was. The point is, the best qualified need to be hired – period.
Maybe the lesbian fire chief in Los Angeles wasn’t incompetent. Or, the lesbian ship captain in New Zealand. Plenty of white men are incompetent, too. That is why the dude wrote The Peter Principle back in the 1970s.
But when you purposely avoid hiring on merit, and merit alone, you gotta figure that you are stacking the deck against yourself.
Anyway, here is a link about FAA hiring:
https://mslegal.org/cases/brigida-v-faa/
Or perhaps stacking the deck against the innocent passengers whose lives are at stake.
Floyd,
I think it is best to wait for more information before any blame can be pointed at any one or any agency. Or, it just could of been bad luck. Regardless, the DC area has had a long history of near misses.
Yeah, but when I read about the conversation at the Zero Hedge link, the controller was not at all clear about what they were saying. Read that at the link. I could not get the image to post as a separate link.
I think there may have been other factors, too. Like not using transponders, and doing those training missions in the first place.
NotReallyaFarmer
Are you commenting from the tractor again today????
You have made a dozen comments and it is not even noon.
Not only are you commenting, you are obviously reading all the other comments.
How do manage to do this while driving the tractor ????
You should be careful.
I would hate to see you end up in a ditch.
You do know that it is January ?
I beleive UF if from upstate NY. The ground is Frozen their right now – I would guess to a depth of 5ft.
Thank you for that, Mr. Say.
John Say,
Thank you for pointing out how the anonymoron lacks any degree of common sense. Oh, and we got about five feet of snow on the ground too.
NotReallyaFarmer
But, but, but yesterday when I challenged you for spending the entire day commenting here instead of taking care of your imaginary “farm”, you said that you were out in the tractor and making comments using wi-fi.
Obviously the “tractor” is just as imaginary as your “farm”.
@John, depending on where he lives… less than 32inches.
testing to see if this link works:
https://cms.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/2025-01-30_07-05-39.png?itok=hEybydYP
Letting anything fly in the approach path was a total mistake, especially with a bunch of flights lined up for landing. That helicopter should never have been given the green light to cross the approach during such a busy landing time. Someone messed up, and I doubt it was the airliner; they were already cleared to land because they were so close to the runway.
And honestly, Trump blaming DEI for the whole thing is the stupidest thing he’s said today.
@George
I am secular and an Independent voter. Having to scroll through your boosheet every day is the far greater task, believe me. If you have a human heart, find it. You are not convincing anyone of anything at all, just testing the patience of people that are actually grown adults trying to talk with one another. And we have shown a preternatural level of restraint at this point.
George: the day isn’t over yet.
Flyod, can’t say on topic eh?
I self-identified what I said as “Being on Topic.”
LMAO
Brilliant, Floyd!!
@Floyd
For once, I agree with Anonymous: it is sad a racist such as yourself gets so much feedback. Whatever, dude. November was a populist victory, not a ‘white religious conservative’ one, and you can take your antiquated nonsense and go blow. The 21st century is going to be mighty hard for the likes of you, Floyd. Yes, it will be better, but not in the way fools like you, Floyd think. 🤷🏻♂️
Meanwhile, over at the Dept of Education:
“One of the biggest battles in the last four years has been over parents’ rights. Basically, Democrats don’t think they have any. That’s changing with the Trump Department of Education, which immediately put the kybosh on fallacious claims that removing pornographic LGBTQ+ books from schools is “book banning.”
On Friday, the DOE issued a press release that goes to war in the caption: “U.S. Department of Education Ends Biden’s Book Ban Hoax.”
The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) today announced that it has dismissed 11 complaints related to so-called “book bans.”
The complaints alleged that local school districts’ removal of age-inappropriate, sexually explicit, or obscene materials from their school libraries created a hostile environment for students – a meritless claim premised upon a dubious legal theory.
Effective Jan. 24, 2025, OCR has rescinded all department guidance issued under the theory that a school district’s removal of age-inappropriate books from its libraries may violate civil rights laws. OCR is also dismissing six additional pending allegations of book banning and will no longer employ a “book ban coordinator” to investigate local school districts and parents working to protect students from obscene content.
The entire press release is worth reading because it shows how aggressively the Biden administration sought to force the LFBTQ+ agenda onto America’s youth:
In June 2023, then-President Biden announced that he would appoint a “book ban coordinator” within OCR. The coordinator’s responsibilities included developing guidance and training to deter schools from limiting student access to sexually graphic or racially divisive books by claiming that these efforts may contribute to a hostile environment that may violate students’ civil rights.”
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/trumps-department-education-finally-says-no-lgbtq-porn-schools
Here’s a link to the actual press release:
https://www.ed.gov/about/news/press-release/us-department-of-education-ends-bidens-book-ban-hoax
Floyd,
Excellent! Even sane and normal traditional Democrats think pornography in elementary school libraries is wrong.
upstate thinks showing cleavage is pornography.
* in a Harvard polysci class lecture the professor wanted to ascertain the preferences of the class in art values. One choice was actor Mel Gibson doing to be or not to be from Hamlet. Another choice was a racist excerpt from Homer Simpson showing two hillbillies in the bed of pick up truck and incest between brother and sister. Another excerpt was a dangerous life threatening thrill show. The students preferred the incest program. Harvard had white hillbilly slurs throughout all 12 lectures in the series.
Porn in the classroom? The children prefer that.
Harvard, huh? Not pre-adult education, like the “book ban hoax” addressed?
Methinks this nony above me should get his drives looked at, the way he is using porn and children in relation.
The Department of Education is entirely bereft of any type or form of legal basis.
The Department of Education is invalid, illegitimate, illicit, and unconstitutional.
When someone mentions the Department of Education, that person should be required to provide a citation from the Constitution to establish its existence.
They cannot.
I notice the Professor’s blog from yesterday about the LA Times has been removed. Did the LA Times’ lawyers take time out from firefighting to resume fighting free speech?
That was my guess, too. Either that, or there was some fundamental error in the article itself, that needed re-writing.
WHAT !!!!
Turley made an error you say ????
Impossible !!!!
Blasphemy !!!
We all know he is infallible.
It is simply not possible for him to make a mistake.
https://jonathanturley.org/2025/01/29/l-a-times-columnist-renews-attacks-on-the-lab-leak-theory-while-dismissing-criticism-of-china/comment-page-3/
If universities or city or state governments actually take action to harbor illegal immigrants that are subject to Federal order of deportation on premises they control, it seems to me that there is precedent for sending in Federal enforcement authorities to drag them out, and to arrest anyone who attempts to physically intervene. Depending on the scale of the resistance, enforcement authority could range from INS personnel up to National Guard units, based on precedent in enforcing Federal civil rights mandates against state and local opposition by Eisenhower in 1957 in Little Rock, AK, and by Johnson in Alabama in 1965. I do not think the difference in the nature of the Federal law being enforced would affect the authority to enforce by whatever means is required.
Yep! My first thought of the day!
Number 6,
Well said!
How about that TSS? Trump’s already saying he knew nothing about the memo freezing federal funding and so he’s blaming other people. TSS… Trump Shit Show.
Haha, Trump accomplishes more in one hour than Biden did in four years. The media is begging him to take a day off because they are exhausted 😩
MAGA baby!
OldManFromKS,
Exactly!! Trump has done more since being sworn in and even prior to than Biden did in four years. Biden was crying he needed Congress to pass a BS law to secure the border and Trump did it even prior to being sworn in!! \
MAGA winning!!
Okay, lets play this out. Federal government withdraws funds from these colleges. They sue. But on what grounds? They clearly have stated they are going to support illegals who broke our immigration laws. How would that play out in front of the SC?
Illegals are the source of all your problems.
“Illegals are the source of all your problems.”
No, the wholesale, deliberate, indiscriminate importation of illegal immigrants by the Biden administration for purposes that were to their partisan advantage, but to the detriment of the interests of most of The People, was a salient symptom of vast, long-term, Fedgov over-reach that has encompassed virtually every aspect of society.
GW Bush did the same thing. What the growth and development industry wants is what government provides.
No. Wacko, stupid, insane leftist policies are many of the problems of this country. Just look at the failed state of CA and how leftist Democrats have destroyed their state. That is why so many people and companies are leaving.
Outmigration cost California $24B in departed incomes as poorer people move in
“304 companies have left California since January 2019, according to the California Policy Center’s California Book of Exoduses, which tracks corporate exits from California.”
California says it lost $2 billion in state income taxes from earners leaving
https://justthenews.com/nation/states/center-square/california-says-it-lost-2-billion-state-income-taxes-earners-leaving
Escaping from LA and the rest of California
“The latest moving map from U-Haul showed that Californians are fleeing the state plagued by high taxes, mudslides, wildfires, high crime, homelessness, and drought.”
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/washington-secrets/3281568/escaping-la-and-rest-of-california/?utm_source=referral&utm_medium=offthepress&utm_campaign=home
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Screenshot-2025-01-09-at-11.05.42%E2%80%AFAM.webp
Easy answer is to eliminate all federal funding to colleges/universities
( the question is whether universities, particularly state institutions, want to go down this road of confrontation rather than cooperation.) This is what puzzles me (not really) but why would a university – especially a government institution of higher learning that accepts government funds) even consider defying the rule of law; which is the bedrock of our culture. Just how did so many people, whose purpose is to implement an agenda counter to our founding principles, ever get anywhere near control of our education industry? The blame for this mess doesn’t singularly land on the hapless shoulders of the indoctrinated but, instead, should be placed squarely on the donors and boards of directors who enable this prog nonsense. We shouldn’t be going after the little fish (the head of this insignificant college); but, rather, we should root out the big money sources that are influencing our institutions – both private and public – to engage in such blatantly illegal activity. Sheltering, aiding and abetting illegals is a federal crime – drop the hammer on these people in a big way and send a direct message that the rule of law reigns supreme, not their infantile ideologies.
@whimsicalmama: You ask how did so many people get anywhere near the control of the education industry? Having experienced them myself, I conclude that most are insufficiently skilled to actually successfully work and function in society, in a real job, and can only exist in an echo chamber and protected by tenure. Those who can, do; those who can’t, teach. Those who can do neither, administrate.
Off Topic: Midair collision at DC Regan airport, 67 dead!
So the Army helicopter was on a routine training mission flying at night in an active runway zone.
I’m waiting for Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth to name the officer who ordered the mission…..And possible court marshal.
Hegseth will when he sobers up.
So funny I forgot to laugh 🥱
He should snort some of Biden’s coke left in the Whitehouse, that will sober him up if needed.
I wonder if the FAA traffic controller was a DEI hire? Definitely the fault of the controller:
“https://www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/2025-01-30_07-05-39.png?itok=hEybydYP
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/small-plane-crashes-near-reagan-national-airport-after-fiery-explosion-caught-camera
Actor Robert Duvall shows how Army helicopters train at Regan Airport
Drunken Army Captain says if you want to enlist then you got to take a test to prove it.
Guess what the most potent weapon of war is?
Perhaps the time has come for staff and students at American Colleges & Universities to experience the vigorous enforcement of 18 USC 111 for interfering in federal law enforcement operations Jonathan. Just a thought. Greg
Professor Turley writes, “Many states and cities have reaffirmed that they will oppose any deportation efforts…”
Sounds like insurrection to me. Bring it. The illegals just need to go home, but the illiberals need jail time.
It is bizarre how the radicals cling to the idea that the “undocumented community” takes president over U.S. citizens.
If these university students are from a foreign country, they can apply for a visa, pay out of state tuition and apply for legal citizenship, especially if they have a skill set that benefits our nation.
Their “logic” is bizarre. If a person wants to live in a European country, they apply for a visa. If they want citizenship, they must legally work in the nation for a time (usually seven years), show proficiency in the language (usually to the B1 level), take a civics exam, have a clean record, have money in the bank and gainful employment.
The Biden administration gave the Cartels past four years of free rein and a blank check to traffic humans and narcotics. They extort them for the money they receive from the government. If they don’t comply, they will torture or kill the family members who remain in their home country.
The past four plus years has been an aggressive campaign by activists of untruth, propaganda and a targeted effort to foist chaos and insanity on the citizens of this nation.
The Cartels are evil and those who are complicit are the same.
Finally, there is a slow awakening of Americans from the stupor and stupidity of these activists.
Good luck to those who harbor criminals and impede federal law enforcement. They institutions might find themselves as a private, non accredited school. In some cases they might be charged with a crime.
The democrats got waxed in this election. Why? I don’t think they figured it out yet and so they cling to their standard gaslighting and lame attacks. It is time for the party to eject the communists and fringe wackos.
E.M.
Exactly! The sane and normal traditional Democrats want the fringe wackos off their side and out of their party. As long as they allow the fringe wackos to stay, to hijack their party, they will continue to lose elections.
“The democrats got waxed in this election.” Right, genius. 77 million people voted against Harris. 75 million people voted against Trump. That’s hardly being waxed. All Trump has to do is ding the economy, which his retarded national tariffs will do in short order, and the Republicans will be wiped out in the midterms. People don’t vote for any one anymore, people vote against.
“People don’t vote for any one anymore, people vote against.”
At the Presidential and Vice Presidential level, the people vote for slates of Electors, who then vote for (or, arguably against, I suppose) the President/VP candidates. That is a big part of our status as a “republic”. Buy a clue somewhere, would you (your federally-subsdized clue allowance has been stopped by Donald Trump)
Trump won all seven swing states. Your attempt to minimize that achievement fails, and fails bigly. The Tariffs will work in terms of jobs and national security. That’s their purpose, as well as applying pressure in international-trade matters. The Dems’ singular focus on their short-term effect on prices is a transparent attempt at deflection. It won’t work. People see through that kind of thing. MAGA baby!
Sadly, you are correct. Perhaps I watch too many zombie movies, but I am no longer certain that intelligence will prevail over mindlessness. It is very possible, and I am afraid, probable, that the Democrats will NOT continue to lose elections. I fully expect them to retake the House in 2026.
It is not the time to celebrate the Death of Woke, or the end of Democrat victories. We are Germany, in 1940, and we have just driven the Brits out of Dunkirk, and we think that we are invincible. We are not.
I will pray that doesn’t happen, Floyd.
Now is the time to keep an eye on Gov. Gavin Newsom, this is His mess to deal with and he will famously walk the gray-line.
He’s weak and synthetic, just like Kamala Harris. Just take notes, come 2027 They’ll be polishing him up for the run for President.
He won’t touch the issue if he can escape it. Why soil a pretty suit.
It’s pretty hard to polish a Turd though. Just sayin……
Trump managed to do it.
I didn’t know Trump had anything to do with the Biden’s legacy?!
Traveler,
Trump has barely been in office for two weeks and by his actions he has shown how much of a turd the Biden admin was.
….including another recent chest-pounding interview by Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker
Jay Robert Pritzker
$3.7B Real Time Net Worth
https://www.forbes.com/profile/jb-pritzker/
ol·i·garch (ŏl′ĭ-gärk′, ō′lĭ-)
n. A member of a small governing faction.
[Greek oligarkhēs : oligos, few + -arkhēs, -arch.]
However, the question is whether universities, particularly state institutions, want to go down this road of confrontation rather than cooperation.
Trotskyism (ˈtrɒtskɪˌɪzəm)
n (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) the theory of Communism developed by Trotsky, in which he called for immediate worldwide revolution by the proletariat….*so that Communist leaders could be oligarchs™ * – Estovir
Leaked documents show Cuban military sitting on billions of dollars amid humanitarian crisis
Even as Cubans have been dying because of shortages of medicines and supplies at hospitals, and the government claims it doesn’t have the money to buy them due to U.S. sanctions, companies run by Cuba’s military have stashed away billions of dollars, according to financial records obtained by the Miami Herald.
Gaviota, a company that runs tourist hotels and is just one of many owned by the military, is sitting on about $4.3 billion in its bank accounts, the documents show.
That’s almost 13 times the $339 million the government said it needed to buy medications to supply Cuban pharmacies annually. The country’s healthcare system lacks 70% percent of the essential medications to treat most illnesses, Cuba’s prime minister said earlier this month.
As the country has plunged into its most profound crisis since the end of the Soviet Union’s subsidies in the 1990s, a multi-headed conglomerate known as GAESA, owned by the Cuba’s Revolutionary Armed Forces, has been holding on to hundreds of millions of dollars that enter the island yearly — and using it in ways that have dramatically worsened the lives of Cubans and increased the country’s debt.
For the first time, a rare leak of GAESA’s internal financial records reveals how much the military has diverted the country’s badly needed hard currency to its enterprises. GAESA keeps this financial information secret and even guards its accounts from government comptrollers, making what the documents reveal even more significant. The documents challenge the government’s claims that it lacks the money to alleviate Cuba’s growing humanitarian crisis.
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/cuba/article297556028.html
Democrats Talking Points are opiates for the masses
Very interesting Estovir. Thanks 🙏
The rulers of despotic banana republics always sequester enough moola to maintain themselves in style while their people starve and die. If anything, the despots that style themselves as Marxists/collectivists are even guiltier of these practices than “business” dictators. Then they grab their remaining wealth and flee for some haven or other at the last moment, just before everything in their little Utopia goes completely to Hell.
“The rulers of despotic banana republics”
Oops, that was me.
Anonymous at 11:05: Were you writing about the Bidens?
Illegal alien university students and employees — which is an oxymoron — have no Rights except due process – they get a hearing to determine their immigration status and then they get sent home. “People” referred to in the Constitution meant people in the Country legally, not those here violating immigration laws. That any court could ‘rule’ otherwise only shows how stupid judges can be.
Our Constitution protects the People of the US — ‘ourselves and our posterity.’ It does not protect invaders — which is what these people are — invaders.
Professor mentioned ‘commandeering.’ I believe the anti-commandeering doctrine only applies to the state and other local governments, not universities. The federal government can’t ‘commandeer’ state and local governments in enforcing federal laws.
This is why sanctuary cities can legally exist — not just immigration sanctuaries, but gun sanctuary cities, also. These locales have stated they won’t help federal officials in enforcing federal laws — perfectly within their powers. They just can’t interfere with federal authorities.
Regarding federal funding, I’m not so informed on that. It seems to me that if federal funding is accepted, the conditions must be followed. If those conditions aren’t followed, well then, no more funding.
What happened to no one is above the law?
lgbmiel,
Great comment. It seems the law is only convenient for woke leftists when it suits them.
Thank you.
I don’t like that local governments refuse to cooperate with feds when it comes to protecting invaders. I won’t be a hypocrite, though.
When it comes to the feds v states, I almost am always on the side of state powers…10th Amendment forever. However, when it involves clear Constitutional authority delegated to the federal government, I support that federal action.
Congress should set strict conditions for states and localities that accept federal funding, do it by roll call vote, and publish the names of the legislators who vote nay or yea. That should clear the air a bit.
“No one is above the law” is an outdated concept that is no longer relevant.
Then why do dems keep saying it about President Trump and his supporters?
I vehemently disagree, though. People may not want to follow it, but no one is above the law. We are a Country of laws, not men. Hopefully, under President Trump, that will soon be followed once again.
No, we are not. We are a country where some people are above the law, based on money or political position. Trump will not change that, nor is there any expectation for him to. Quite the opposite, Trump will vigorously go after those who oppose his policies.
Illegal actions don’t abrogate equal protection of the laws.
President Trump will rightly ‘vigorously go after’ those who violate Constitutional laws and policies.
Trump was elected with a clear mandate, that is the only law that matters. Those who obstruct his policies, which are the polices of the American People, will be dealt with.
I don’t agree with that, either.
We elected a president, we didn’t pass any laws. I will not be a hypocrite. If any of President’s policies violate the Constitution, I will not support them. That doesn’t mean I would withdraw my support of President Trump, just certain actions.
Looking at the firing of the IGs. I’ve read Congress must have 30 days notice and other things. If that is the case, President Trump must fix it. Such as notifying Congress and putting those 17 IGs on paid leave until the 30 days are up. Something to that effect.
I think the People of the US elected President Trump to enact Constitutional policies, which follow Constitutional laws.
Can someone please explain what “rights” illegal immigrants have and under what authority? Thank you.
For starters they have all rights under the Bill of Rights.
There need not be any handwringing about so-called unconstitutional conditions. Just yank the funding unconditionally. No conditions at all.
That’s what Trump is doing with NGOs that facilitate illegal immigration, and it looks like it’ll work:
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1884339632210600161.html
One problem: refugees are NOT illegal aliens. Your article is about refugees, not illegal aliens. They are legally admitted refugees. The NGOs facilitate their settlement and help them navigate the benefits they can legally use, including housing, how to pay for things, enrolling their children in school, etc.
Afghan refugees or family members of LEGAL immigrants who helped the U.S. against the Taliban and such are not illegal. That’s the distinction. Refugees are not illegal aliens. NGO’s having their funding abruptly yanked because of incompetence and stupidity is the bigger problem. Trump’s administration did the very thing he blamed California for: massive mismanagement and poor planning.
Are you naive enough to actually believe what you wrote, or are you just blowing smoke? My guess is the latter.
Knowing reading comprehension is not your forte, I’m not surprised you don’t understand.
Refugees? You mean, people seeking asylum? whereby, under international law, they are required to apply for said asylum at the first port of entry of a non-combative neighboring country? Not, as these “refugee” NGOs do, have the “refugees” shop around until they find a country to freeload off of?
No, refugees are not the same as asylum seekers; there is a key difference. Refugees are individuals who are fleeing from war, famine, or natural disasters, and they have been accepted and/or transported to our country or fled on their own. Refugees are considered to be temporary residents and are here legally. Because of their legal status, they are entitled to certain benefits and assistance to help them settle in for the short term. This is the role that NGOs play.
Given that many here struggle with reading comprehension, I don’t expect everyone to understand the distinction between “refugees” and “asylum seekers”.