Connect with us

News

Sanctuary Cities are Still Mooching Off the Federal Government

Published

on

A vast majority of the cities and townships that applied for federal law enforcement grants have received them, despite attempts from the Trump administration to withhold funding from sanctuary cities.

President Donald Trump issued an executive order in January 2017 to block federal funding from jurisdictions that harbor illegal immigrants and refuse to work with federal immigration authorities. The Department of Justice took the fight a step further in November 2017 when it targeted 29 specific cities, metro areas, counties and states, accusing them of violating federal law with their “sanctuary policies.”.

Then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions sent a letter to these 29 jurisdictions, warning that they must follow federal law or else risk having federal funds cut off from them.

Trending: Los Angeles Enacts Full Coronavirus Lockdown for Three Weeks

Despite these warnings, all but one of the jurisdictions have either received or are now eligible to receive funds in the 16 months that have passed since the letters were first issued. The Justice Department revealed this development to the Associated Press.  These 29 localities include cities ranging from Burlington, Vermont to Los, Angeles, California. The state of Oregon has been the sole exception, given that it has yet to be cleared to receive federal grants from 2017.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

The Trump Administration’s failure to cut off federal law enforcement funding to sanctuary cities is due to several losses it has faced in the courtroom.

Two California counties were successful in filing a lawsuit in a district court against the Trump Administration’s threats to deny federal funds to sanctuary cities. The 9th Circuit Court of appeals ended up upholding the court’s opinion in August 2018.

The U.S. Conference of Mayors joined the fray when it filed a lawsuit against the measure in 2018, and a federal court in September 2018 temporarily blocked the Department of Justice from withholding funds from cities that were represented by the Conference of Mayors.

The Justice Department is still considering whether it will appeal some of the court decisions.

In January 2018, Sessions called out sanctuary cities for their obstruction:

“I continue to urge all jurisdictions under review to reconsider policies that place the safety of their communities and their residents at risk.”

Sessions added:

“Protecting criminal aliens from federal immigration authorities defies common sense and undermines the rule of law.”

The dangers of sanctuary cities were recently on display in February when a California sheriff’s deputy was shot by an illegal immigrant wanted by Immigration and Customs Enforcement while conducting a traffic stop. This immigrant was able to stay in the U.S. because local authorities refused to cooperate with federal authorities.

Footage of this incident went viral and has served as a wake-up call for immigration reform advocates nationwide.

Sanctuary cities and similar arrangements that allow illegal immigrants and other immigrants who refuse to assimilate to congregate en masse will inevitably lead to the creation of  No Go Zones as seen in Europe, and become crime hubs.

The effects are real and will affect every day Americans.

Sadly, the political class has dragged its feet on the issue and works to roadblock President Trump’s sensible immigration reforms.

Culture

Starbucks Barista FIRED After Refusing to Wear “Pride” T-Shirt for Religious Reasons, According to Lawsuit

She is a Christian and was apparently told by her manager that she didn’t have to wear it.

Published

on

A former Starbucks barista is filing an unlawful discrimination lawsuit against the coffee giant, claiming they fired her for refusing to wear a “Pride” t-shirt that violated her Christian religious convictions.

Betsy Fresse started working as a barista in December 2015. After transferring to a Glen Ridge, New Jersey, store in early 2019, managers apparently “assured” her that her Christian faith wouldn’t be an issue.

Then in June 2019, she noticed a box of Pride shirts on a desk and asked if they’d make her wear one. Her store manager said she wouldn’t have to, but two months later she found herself out of a job after being terminated by a district manager.

A notice of separation claims that Fresse was fired for violating Starbucks’ “core values.” It specifically mentions an incident where she said her colleagues “need Jesus” when given the “Pride” shirt.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Starbucks maintains that “no part of our dress code requires partners to wear any approved items that they have not personally selected” and that Fresse’s claims are “without merit,” in a comment to the New York Post.

So Starbucks denies that she was fired for not wearing the shirt, yet their notice of separation appears to claim that they fired her for something she said about Jesus. Not a good look either way.

Fresse is seeking backpay, punitive damages, money to cover the cost of an attorney, and a permanent injunction that prevents Starbucks from “failing to accommodate […] sincerely held religious beliefs.”

Starbucks has long been a major player in the world of Woke Capital. Back in February Big League Politics reported on how the British branch of Starbucks was raising money for a pro-transgender lobbying group:

The U.K. branch of Starbucks is raising money to push for the chemical castration and surgical mutilation of children.

Nathanael Blake at The Federalist reported that the multinational titan is selling special mermaid-shaped cookies to help the pro-transgender lobbying group Mermaids. Curiously, the group’s founder took her underage son to Thailand to undergo a castration procedure.

Blake correctly observed “That Starbucks is supporting this group illustrates how thoroughly radicals have conquered both the LGBT movement and corporate culture.”

He also called attention to how “In a few years the fight has shifted from government recognition of same-sex relationships as legal marriages to mastectomies, sterilization, and castration for children.”

Here’s hoping that Betsy Fresse is successful in her lawsuit.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending