Here’s Why We Need a Ban on ‘Sanctuary Cities’ Despite This Judge’s Ruling

November 21, 2017

WRITER

What happened?

A U.S. district court judge has blocked President Donald Trump’s executive order to cut funding from “sanctuary cities,” or cities that don’t comply with Immigration and Customs Enforcement to find and deport illegal immigrants.

Judge William Orrick issued the ruling on Monday, saying that Trump is overstepping his authority by changing policy on spending that was approved by Congress. Trump signed the executive order in January.

Is this related to “Kate’s law”?

Yes. Sanctuary cities became a national issue following outcry over 32-year-old Kate Steinle’s death in San Francisco. She was allegedly killed by an illegal immigrant firing a handgun after local authorities let him go; he had reportedly been deported five times before the incident.

Bill O'Reilly: Kate's Law Signals to the People the 'Government Will Protect Us'

Despite being controlled by Republicans, Congress hasn’t managed to take action on legislation known as “Kate’s law” that would increase criminal penalties on illegal immigrants who commit crimes, are deported and then return to the U.S.

Where did we land on this?

The bill passed in the House over the summer but has been stalled in the Senate.

Standing in for Glenn on today’s show, Doc talked about Kate Steinle’s tragic death and the importance of protecting Americans from people who feel free to cross the border and break our laws over and over.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

DOC: Jim was walking with a family friend and his daughter on a sunny day along a pier in San Francisco. If you -- if you've ever been to the piers in San Francisco, man, that is -- it's a really nice experience. And that's where Jim was. Walking with his daughter and a family friend. Just a great day at the pier.

All of a sudden, there was a loud bang. Suddenly, something was wrong with his daughter. She threw her arms around him. And she whispered, "Help me, Dad." She then collapsed in front of him.

He couldn't figure out what was wrong. She didn't have any health problems. She was a healthy girl. As she fell to the ground and he struggled to find out what was going on with his daughter, a passerby stopped to help.

Suggested they turn her over, on to her back. So they did. And as they rolled her onto her side and then to her back, they could -- they could see blood. Then they noticed a hole in her back. That hole turned out to be a bullet hole. The loud bang was a gun being fired.

Paramedics arrived. They rushed her to the hospital. And she was declared dead.

In just minutes, this father was walking with his daughter. Minutes later, she was dead.

That is the story of how Kate Steinle died, after being shot by José Zarate, two years ago. Yesterday, attorneys began their final arguments in the murder case against José. Also yesterday, a federal judge permanently blocked President Trump's executive order to cut funding from sanctuary cities. Judge William Orrick said President Trump cannot set new conditions on spending approved by Congress.

Ironic, that while final arguments are unfolding for her killer, a federal judge blocked President Trump's attempt to somehow stop sanctuary cities.

Now, we can debate back and forth. In fact, we could get great legal minds on. Constitutional experts. To say whether or not it was within the power of the president to withhold funds from somebody who is violating federal law, even though Congress has allocated those funds.

In fact, I'll even, right now, say he doesn't have the authority to do that. I'll just give that to you.

Federal Judge Orrick, if that is the case, so be it.

But at least President Trump tried to do something, which is more than I can say for most people in Washington, DC, now or in the past. At least he attempted to do something. At least he tried to do something that he made a significant campaign issue, while he was running for president. Kate Steinle and others have been killed, murdered, at the hands of illegals.

This is a national security threat, as well as a domestic security threat, once they're around. Once they're in America. And while people will cite statistics and tell you, well, there's a bunch of studies that show you that illegals commit less crimes than others, then American citizens -- does that matter? If only one illegal commits one murder, you're okay with that? How about if it's your daughter you're walking with on a sunny day, that gets murdered?

Then I'll bet, you're not as okay with it. The truth is, it is absolutely within the power of the United States to decide who enters our country. It is absolutely within our power. It is moral. It is reasonable. And it is logical to know who is coming into America.

It is also reasonable and logical and certainly not hateful, to limit who comes in America. We should have an open and active, yet monitored border.

A border that allows people to go back and forth, coming and going, for the purpose of commerce and travel, vacations. Absolutely.

But we got to know who it is. We live in an increasingly dangerous world. And it's ironic that so many people that support the idea of sanctuary cities and tell me that, you know, they commit less crimes than American citizens, are the same people who tell me that guns are a problem.

They're the ones going after specifically just guns. They're willing to go after one, one way you can kill people. One way you can be violent. Because of their agenda. But a typical lack of consistency, aren't willing to go after sanctuary cities that help protect and promote illegals, who quite often perpetrate violence on American citizens.

José had been deported five times. He was awaiting his sixth deportation. He was homeless in San Francisco at the time of the shooting. He had just finished a prison sentence for illegal reentry, when he was transferred not out of the country. But to the San Francisco county jail, to face a 20-year pot charge.

That's when they decide to let him go. why do the sheriff let him go? Because of his sanctuary city status. Because of that policy, it limits cooperation with federal immigration authorities.

So if he was held on some immigration issue, he was in the country illegally, they were not going to keep him. They were not going to turn him over to the federal government. They were not going to cooperate.

So you don't support sanctuary cities, fine. How do you propose we protect the Kate Steinle's of the world? And what's it going to take for you to get it? Do you have to be walking with your daughter or son on a sunny day and see them get murdered in front of you? Is that what it's going to take?

I'll bet for some people, it wouldn't even take that. That even if that happened, they still wouldn't get it. So while we're debating what should happen to José, Congress is floating the idea of amnesty. In the middle of all of this.

Her killer has still not been brought to justice. And, by the way, her story is not unique. I mean, you could go to the remembrance project. They calculate -- or, excuse me -- record. They record and promote the stories of people who were skilled or had violence perpetrated against them by illegals, fighting against this narrative that, oh, they're just here illegally. Nothing else bad happens.

Trying to keep those people's memories alive and telling the world that, hey, this is a problem. It's not unique. It's not rare. Whether it's a hit-and-run and somebody is killed. Which, I remember when I was still working at WRVA in Virginia. A couple of nuns were killed. Another guy in the community was killed, and I had interviewed his brother about it. By drunk drivers.

There has to be a way we monitor these people and make sure they're not here doing bad things. That's not immoral. That's not hateful.

But Congress -- and it's also Republicans -- aren't even considering that. You've got the courts that are fighting against President Trump and his actions against sanctuary cities. And members of Congress are not saying, hey, let's come up with some sort of sanctuary city bill, because we're the ones that appropriate money and say, if you do this, you will not have money appropriated to you.

Where is Congress on this? Their silence is deafening. Instead, they're working on amnesty. Being floated right now around Capitol Hill is another round of amnesty.

Now, we know they've been fighting for amnesty for the so-called Dreamers, seeing if they can make them legal, giving them a pathway to citizenship. But there's a bunch of Democrats and even some Republicans, that are quietly trying to come up with the proper way to craft a new amnesty message.

Look for this. Expect this in the next couple of months. They may try to tie it to some other big bill, you know, a debt ceiling raise or something like that. But they are working on it.

Now, I am willing to move a great distance off of my beliefs and what I know is right, the belief that we should not reward bad. And I will reluctantly, begrudgingly, give up the idea of legal -- of children -- the so-called Dreamers that were brought here by others being deported. I will begrudgingly come up with some way we can give them a pathway, because after all, they didn't commit the crime. Somebody else did.

But that has to be part of the deal, where we kick out everybody else, that is here illegally. I'm not willing to give an inch on that. Somebody has to be held accountable for coming here illegally. And for those Dreamers who brought them here illegally. Congress is working on amnesty. Be prepared to fight that fight in the coming couple of months. Your calls coming up next on the Glenn Beck Program.

Woke ideology trumps medicine in America's top 5 medical schools

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Progressive ideology has infected our most prestigious medical schools and is seeping into our medical system.

As Glenn covered in his latest TV special, "diversity, equity and inclusion" (DEI), and leftist rhetoric have overtaken science and medicine as the focus of medical schools across the nation. The next generation of doctors and nurses is being force-fed DEI and "anti-racist" nonsense at the expense of slipping standards. This has led to a decline in people's trust in the medical industry and for good reason. Woke ideology has already been the driving force behind at least one medical malpractice case, and more are undoubtedly on the way.

All of this is being spearheaded by universities, which have integrated DEI practices into the fabric of their programs. Our top medical schools now require students and staff to participate in mandatory DEI and "anti-racist" classes and training and are adjusting the standards to reflect this new shift in focus. Here are 5 statements from the top American medical schools that show that medicine is no longer their primary focus:

Harvard Medical School

Boston Globe / Contributor | Getty Images

Taken from the Harvard University "Unconscious bias" resource page:

“As members of HMS, we each have a responsibility to create an inclusive community that values all individuals. Barriers to inclusion may include assumptions we make about others that guide our interactions. Recognizing our Unconscious Bias is a critical step in developing a culture of equity and inclusion within HMS and in our partnerships with other communities.”

The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine

Rob Carr / Staff | Getty Images

Pulled from the JHM Office of Diversity, Inclusion and Health Equity blog:

“One-hour live, virtual unconscious bias training ... [w]ill be required at all Johns Hopkins Health System (JHHS) entities for managers and above; hospital nurse leaders; credentialed providers (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners); and for school of medicine faculty and trainees (including residents, fellows, medical and graduate students, and research postdocs), as well as those at a manager level or above.”

Stanford University School of Medicine

Philip Pacheco / Stringer | Getty Images

Found on the Stanford Medicine Commission on Justice and Equity page:

“The Commission on Justice and Equity—composed of external and internal leaders, experts, and advocates—represents an institution-wide, collaborative effort to dismantle systemic racism and discrimination within our own community and beyond.”

Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania

Education Images / Contributor | Getty Images

Taken from the Penn Medicine Commitment to Inclusion, Equity, and Antiracism site:

“We openly acknowledge the role of structural forces of oppression as primary drivers of the disparate health outcomes. We believe that working to reverse the underrepresentation of historically excluded groups is critical in achieving equitable health outcomes. While this is an ongoing journey for our program, here are some of the tangible steps we have taken to achieve an inclusive culture”

Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons

Jeenah Moon / Stringer | Getty Images

Pulled from the Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons Diversity, Equity, Inclusivity, Justice, and Anti-Racism page:

"Courses are being revised to be more inclusive and informed by the key principle of race as a social construct and a social determinant of health. We are training faculty that Anti-Racism is not an add-on to a course. Anti-Racism is a pedagogy - a manner of teaching, designing courses, and measuring learning outcomes. We make sure that the classroom environment is inclusive by holding space for respectful conversation and ensuring that we address any “classroom ruptures”– a disorienting dilemma or situation when a bias or microaggression that may occur, providing real time opportunities for professional development, learning, and growth. Racist actions and remarks are never tolerated at Columbia University and will be dealt with following established protocols."

Critical theory destroys truth and justice

Editor's note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Critical theory once stood out as the absurd progressive notion that it is. Now, its maxims are becoming an integral part of ordinary political discourse. The more you repeat a lie, the more you will believe it, and this is the very dangerous place in which we find ourselves today.

Take this critical theory maxim as an example: If we desire justice, we must sometimes champion what may appear superficially as injustice. It's a necessary evil, if you will, the necessity of “controlled injustice.”

By using truth through fabrication and controlled injustice for justice, we’ll save the republic. We’ll be acting in a noble way.

This definition of justice is defined by the “oppressed,” not the “oppressor.” It is the greatest happiness for the greatest number. To achieve this justice, however, we need to endorse acts on occasion that, while seemingly unjust, serve a higher purpose. It will ensure the stability and the unity of our republic, and this may manifest in ways that seem contradictory to our values. But these are the necessary shadows to cast light on “true justice.”

And isn’t that what we are all after, anyway?

Here’s another critical theory maxim: Sometimes we find the truth through fabrication. Our pursuit of truth sometimes requires a strategic use of falsehoods. The truth is a construct that has been shaped and tailored to promote the well-being of the collective.

We sometimes need to accept and propagate lies designed by "the system” — not the old system, but the system that we’re now using to replace the old to get more justice through injustice and more truth through fabrication.

We’re engaging in a higher form of honesty. When we fabricate, it’s for the right reason. We are reaching up to the heavens fighting for a higher sort of honesty. To fortify the truth, we occasionally must weave a tapestry of lies. Each thread, essential for the greater picture, will ultimately define our understanding and ensure our unity under this infallible wisdom.

The election is coming up. Does this maxim sound familiar? Many think it is imperative that we secure our republic through election control to maintain our republic. Sometimes, we might need to take actions that by traditional standards might be questionable.

The act of securing elections requires cheating. It's not mere deception. It is a noble act of safeguarding our way of life. We're on the verge of losing this democracy, and without deception, we will lose it.

To ensure it doesn't fall into the hands of those we know will destroy it, we may have to make a few fabrications. We're fabricating stories to be able to control or secure the republic through our elections. By using truth through fabrication and controlled injustice for justice, we'll save the republic. Therefore, we'll be acting in a noble way. Stealing an election from those who wish to harm our society is truly an act of valor and an essential measure to protect our values and ensure the continuation of our just society.

If we desire justice, we must sometimes champion what may appear superficially as injustice.

I know it's a paradox of honor through dishonor. But in this context, by embracing the dishonor, we achieve the highest form of honor, ensuring the stability and the continuation of our great republic.

Let this be heard, far and wide, as a great call to patriotic action. As we advance, let each of us, citizens of this great and honorable republic, consider these principles. Not as abstract or paradoxical but as practical guides to daily life. Embrace the necessity of controlled injustice, the utility of lies, the duty to secure our electoral process, and the honor and apparent dishonor. These are not merely strategies for survival. They are prerequisites for our prosperity.

We all have to remember that justice is what our leaders define, that truth is what our party tells us. Our republic stands strong on the values of injustice for justice, honor through dishonor, and the fabrication of truths. To deviate from this path is to jeopardize the very fabric of our society. Strength through unity; unity through strength.

We've heard this nonsense for so long. But now, this nonsense is becoming an instituted reality, and we are entering perilous times. Don't be fooled by the narratives you will hear during the march to November. Never let someone convince you that the ends justify the means, that a little bit of injustice is needed to achieve a broader, collective vision of justice, that truth sometimes requires fabricated lies and narratives. If we do, justice will cease to be justice, truth will cease to be truth, and our republic will be lost.

Top 5 MOST EVIL taxes the government extorts from you

David McNew / Staff | Getty Images

"In this world nothing is certain but death and taxes." -Ben Franklin

The injustice of taxation has been a core issue for Americans since the very beginning of our country, and it's a problem we have yet to resolve. This belief was recently reignited in many Americans earlier this month on tax day when the numbers were crunched and it was discovered that the government was somehow owed even more hard-earned money. As Glenn recently discussed on his show, it's getting to be impossible for most Americans to afford to live comfortably, inflation is rising, and our politicians keep getting richer.

The taxpayer's burden is heavier than ever.

The government is not above some real low blows either. While taxes are a necessary evil, some taxes stretch the definition of "necessary" and emphasize the "evil." Here are the top five most despicable taxes that are designed to line the IRS coffers at your expense:

Income Tax

Joe Raedle / Staff | Getty Images

"It would be a hard government that should tax its people one-tenth part of their income." -Ben Franklin

On February 24th, 2024 we hit a very unfortunate milestone, the 101st anniversary of the 16th Amendment, which authorized federal income tax. Where does the government get the right to steal directly out of your paycheck?

Death Taxes

Dan Mullan / Staff | Getty Images

"Now my advice for those who die, Declare the pennies on your eyes" -George Harrison

Not even in death can you escape the cold pursuit of the tax collector. It's not good enough that you have to pay taxes on everything you buy and every penny you make your entire life. Now the feds want a nice slice, based on the entire value of your estate, that can be as much as 40 percent. Then the state government gets to stick their slimy fingers all over whatever remains before your family is left with the crumbs. It's practically grave-robbery.

Payroll

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

"The power to tax is the power to destroy." -John Marshall

What's that? The nice chunk of your paycheck the government nabs before you can even get it to the bank wasn't enough? What if the government taxed your employer just for paying you? In essence, you make less than what your agreed pay rate is and it costs your employer more! Absolutely abominable.

Social Security

VALERIE MACON / Contributor | Getty Images

"We don't have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven't taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much." -Ronald Reagan

Everyone knows the collapse of Social Security is imminent. It has limped along for years, only sustained by a torrent of tax dollars and the desperate actions of politicians. For decades, people have unwillingly forked over money into the system they will never see again.

FICA

Kevin Dietsch / Staff | Getty Images

"What at first was plunder assumed the softer name of revenue." -Thomas Paine

FICA is the payroll equivalent of Social Security. Your employer has to match however much you pay. It means it costs your employer even more to pay you—again, you'll NEVER see that money. At this point, are you even working for yourself, or are you just here to generate money for the government to frivolously throw away?

5 DISTURBING ways World War III will be different from previous wars

Oleg Nikishin / Stringer | Getty Images

Has World War III begun?

Over the weekend, Iran launched an unprecedented attack against Israel involving over 300 missiles and drones. This marked the first direct attack on Israel originating from Iranian territory. Fortunately, according to an Israel Defense Forces spokesperson Rear Admiral Daniel Hagari, 99 percent of missiles and drones were successfully neutralized by Israeli defense systems. Iran claimed that the operation against Israel had concluded and that no further offensive was planned, although the possibility of another attack is still present.

This has left many people, including Glenn, wondering the same thing: did we just witness the start of World War III?

Glenn recently had a World War II Air Force Veteran as a guest on his TV special, who told stories of the horrors he and his brothers-in-arms faced in the skies over war-torn Europe. This was a timely reminder of the terrors of war and a warning that our future, if it leads to another world war, is a dark one.

But, if Glenn's coverage of the Iranian attack revealed one thing, it's that World War III will look nothing like the world wars of the twentieth century. Long gone are the days of John "Lucky" Luckadoo and his "Bloody Hundredth" bravely flying their B-17s into battle. Over the weekend, we saw hundreds of autonomous drones and missiles clashing with extreme speed and precision over several different fronts (including space) simultaneously. This ain't your grandfather's war.

From EMP strikes to cyber attacks, here are FIVE ways the face of war has changed:

EMP attacks

New York Daily News Archive / Contributor | Getty Images

The entire modern world, on every level, is completely dependent on electricity. From your home refrigerator to international trade, the world would come to a grinding halt without power. And as Glenn has pointed out, it wouldn't even be that hard to pull off. All it would take is 3 strategically placed, high-altitude nuclear detonations and the entire continental U.S. would be without power for months if not years. This would cause mass panic across the country, which would be devastating enough on its own, but the chaos could be a perfect opportunity for a U.S. land invasion.

Nuclear strikes

Galerie Bilderwelt / Contributor | Getty Images

Nuclear war is nothing new. Many of us grew up during the Cold War, built fallout shelters, and learned to duck and cover. But times have changed. The Berlin Wall fell and so did the preparedness of the average American to weather a nuclear attack. As technology has advanced, more of our adversaries than ever have U.S. cities within their crosshairs, and as Glenn has pointed out, these adversaries are not exactly shy about that fact. Unfortunately, the possibility of an atomic apocalypse is as real as ever.

Immigration warfare

Nick Ut / Contributor | Getty Images

The strategy of strangling an opposing nation's economy to gain the upper hand is a wartime tactic as old as time. That's why the Border Crisis is so alarming. What better way to damage an opponent's economy than by overburdening it with millions of undocumented immigrants? As Glenn has covered, these immigrants are not making the trek unaided. There is a wide selection of organizations that facilitate this growing disaster. These organizations are receiving backing from around the globe, such as the WEF, the UN, and U.S. Democrats! Americans are already feeling the effects of the border crisis. Imagine how this tactic could be exploited in war.

Cyber shutdowns

Bill Hinton / Contributor | Getty Images

Cyber attacks will be a major tactic in future wars. We've already experienced relatively minor cyber strikes from Russia, China, and North Korea, and it is a very real possibility that one of our adversaries inflicts a larger attack with devastating consequences on the United States. In fact, the WEF has already predicted a "catastrophic" cyber attack is imminent, and Glenn suggests that it is time to start preparing ourselves. A cyber attack could be every bit as devastating as an EMP, and in a world run by computers, nothing is safe.

Biological assault

WPA Pool / Pool | Getty Images

Don't trust the "experts." That was the takeaway many of us had from the pandemic, but something less talked about is the revelation that China has manufactured viruses that are capable of spreading across the globe. We now know that the lab leak hypothesis is true and that the Wuhan lab manufactured the virus that infected the entire world. That was only ONE virus from ONE lab. Imagine what else the enemies of America might be cooking up.