A Trend of State Preemption?

This reaction of “sanctuary states” could get interesting. Of course there’s kabuki involved, but centgov relies a lot for state resources to enforce edicts. Abbott asked the state legislature in Texas to send him a bill.

Can’t wait for Jbiden’s response.


IX and X Amendments making their rightful comebacks.


I have no problem with this, but it’s all kabuki.

No practical effect.

I disagree. For the reason stated. And there’s precedence.

All the Fed has to do is withhold funding for whatever to get them to comply…

I understand that there is precedence - I assume you’re talking about marijuana laws and sanctuary states - but as of this moment in time, the law has no practical effect. The guy who wrote it even said so - it’s theater based on hypothetical future laws.

It would be interesting if the States withheld funding of the Fed in return.


You could have just said “extortion”.

Like the sanctuary states and cities?



1 Like

All it means is that they won’t assist the feds with federal gun crime. Same as with immigration or drugs. It doesn’t actually prevent the feds from charging anyone in that state. America is a dual jurisdiction nation.

And ironically states actually lean on the feds for gun crimes way more than the other way around.

I just said that.


Did you? What about logistics?

If this goes to the Supreme Court, How do you think this ends up?