And the one under discussion in this thread has to do with local elected leaders commanding local law enforcement officers to not cooperate with federal ICE Agents, which you falsely assert they may do in consequence of the Tenth Amendment. Judge Leinenweber debunked your absurd contention.
And what has the court stated about local elected leaders restricting their law enforcement officers from cooperating with our federal government?
For the answer to this question let us read Judge Harry D. Leinenweber’s recent WRITTEN OPINION dealing with 8 U.S. Code § 1373 - Communication between government agencies and the Immigration and Naturalization Service
“The constitutionality of Section 1373 has been challenged before. The Second Circuit in City of New York v. United States, 179 F.3d 29 (2d Cir. 1999), addressed a facial challenge to Section 1373 in similar circumstances. By executive order, New York City prohibited its employees from voluntarily providing federal immigration authorities with information concerning the immigration status of any alien. Id. at 31-32. The city sued the United States, challenging the constitutionality of Section 1373 under the Tenth Amendment.
Id. at 32.
_The Second Circuit found that Section 1373 did not compel state or local governments to enact or administer any federal regulatory program or conscript local employees into its service, and therefore did not run afoul of the rules gleaned from the Supreme Court’s Printz and New York decisions. City of New York, 179 F.3d at 35. Rather, the court held that Section 1373 prohibits local governmental entities and officials only from directly restricting the voluntary exchange of immigration information with the INS. Ibid. The Court found that the Tenth Amendment, normally a shield from federal power, could not be turned into “a sword allowing states and localities to engage in passive resistance that frustrates federal programs.”
“The Court denies the City’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction with respect to the compliance condition, because the City has failed to establish a likelihood of success on the merits”.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Harry D. Leinenweber, Judge
United States District Court