The New Nullification Crisis

ICE agents shot and killed a man in Minneapolis.  The man was armed and resisting arrest.  This article reports that his parents urged him not to engage with ICE.  Though I am in favor of the 2nd Amendment and the right to bear arms, it does not seem wise to be armed when you know you are going to be in contact with armed police.  Don't bring a gun to a peaceful protest.  Definitely don't escalate things when you are armed.

Combined with Renee Good's death, the situation in Minnesota is spiraling out of control.  Governor Walz and Mayor Frey are making matters worse with their vocal opposition to ICE.  This is a resurrection of the Nullification Crisis of 1832.  President Andrew Jackson threatened to march an army into South Carolina and his Vice President, John C. Calhoun, resigned over the issue.  Trump has threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act.

Cynical Publius, an insightful commentator on X, argues that the problem is that no one is asking the right question.  Currently, the Democrats are framing the issue by hyping the protests and claiming that the administration is fascist.  The Republicans are, as usual, on defense.  The simple solution is to turn it around would be to ask this question:

Why do you oppose the lawful enforcement of America's long-standing bipartisan immigration laws?

That is what is happening.  Duly passed laws are being enforced.  There is no good answer to this question, so every politician will dodge it, change the subject, or claim it isn't the law.  That reaction is an answer in itself.

Sanctuary Counties

In Virginia, 91 of the 96 counties have declared themselves to be 2nd Amendment sanctuaries.  How is it that the state passed a law that the overwhelming majority of counties oppose?  This is a case of urban centers attempting to enforce their preferences in rural areas.  The urban centers are far more populous than the rural areas and can swamp them with votes.  However, a law that may be appropriate for a densely populated city might be unworkable for a low density area.

It is funny that the party that celebrates sanctuary cities, counties, and states when the issue is illegal immigration is outraged when the same tactic is used for gun rights.  Why is it okay - even commendable - for California and Colorado to ignore Federal law as regards marijuana but it is wrong when that same tactic is used by 'the other side' to protect gun rights?  Either we live by the laws that are passed or we have localities nullify laws they don't like.  Pick one and be consistent.

As a fan of federalism, my preference is for localities to govern themselves.  Cities should not be allowed to strong arm rural areas because they have more votes in the legislature.  This is resolved at the federal level with the bicameral legislature but is meaningless at the state level thanks to a Reynolds v. Sims, which negated the point of bicameralism.

Nullification Crisis II

After a series of tariff bills passed through Congress in the 1820s and 1830s, South Carolina had had enough.  Declaring the tariffs unconstitutional, the state refused to enforce them.  Other states were also not keen on the tariffs and watched carefully to see if they should adopt the nullification position.  President Jackson was not amused and made preparations to enforce federal law by calling up the military and stationing ships in South Carolina harbors to collect tariffs.  South Carolina threatened secession and assembled an army.  A civil war was brewing.  Thankfully, Congress passed a compromise tariff that saved face for both parties and the crisis was averted.

 

Today, throughout the country, there are polities that refuse to obey immigration law.  The sanctuary cities have shielded people who are illegally in the country.  Immigration and border control is a federal responsibility.  The Supreme Court struck down Arizona's attempt to enforce immigration law because such would usurp federal authority.  The ruling made it abundantly clear that the federal government has primacy in immigration enforcement, even when it chooses not to enforce laws to the detriment of the states.  Thanks to the lax enforcement of existing law by previous administrations, the nullification practiced by sanctuary cities has resulted in no pushback.  That has changed.

 

President Trump requires no legislation from Congress to dramatically change the landscape.  Sanctuary cities have been illegal all along.  ICE needs no additional laws to start making arrests.  They are called illegal immigrants for cause.  Likewise, the law for Trump's border wall was passed in 2006.  Senators Biden, Clinton, and Obama all voted in favor of the Secure Fence Act that George W. Bush signed.  The infrastructure to enforce the borders has been in place for years but the executive will to do so only arrived last Friday.