Nolan Rappaport writes in The Hill:
“Federal financial assistance refers to assistance that non-federal entities, like cities, “receive or administer in the form of grants, loans, loan guarantees, property, cooperative agreements, interest subsidies, insurance, food commodities, direct appropriations, or other assistance.”
Conditioning federal funds in this manner has been found to be permissible when the conditions “bear some relationship to the purpose of the federal spending,” but Barletta’s bill does not require a showing that a substantial number of undocumented immigrants are receiving the federal financial assistance that it would cut off.
Sanctuary cities are subject to federal laws that prohibits withholding immigration related information from federal immigration officials, but the meat cleaver solution that Barletta is proposing to enforce those laws is not the answer.
Moreover, sanctuary cities have alternatives to defying federal law.”
*******************************
Nolan has written a number of previous articles, posted and indexed on immigrationcourtside, dealing with various aspects of the “Sanctuary Cities” issue.
PWS
01-23-16