As AG Pam Bondi Turns Her Office into a Political Theater, Critics Say She Needs to Be Re-educated on States’ Rights.

As AG Pam Bondi Turns Her Office into a Political Theater, Critics Say She Needs to Be Re-educated on States’ Rights.

The news as it trends.

Numerous policy practice professionals and legal scholars are currently expressing amusement regarding Pam Bondi’s decision to announce a lawsuit against New York Governor Kathy Hochul and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

The lawsuit in question pertains to New York’s immigration policies, particularly the Green Light Law, which permits undocumented immigrants to acquire driver’s licenses.

During her press conference, Bondi stated that the Justice Department had filed charges against Governor Hochul, Attorney General James, and DMV Commissioner Mark Schroeder, alleging that New York’s policies favor illegal immigrants over American citizens.

This assertion has been widely regarded as unfounded, lacking any evidence to support the claim that undocumented immigrants are prioritized over citizens when it comes to acquiring licenses or evading laws pertaining to motor vehicle regulations.

It is crucial to clarify that the lawsuit is a civil matter rather than a criminal one.

Notably, as Pam Bondi appears to transform her office into a political theater, there seems to be no public record of the lawsuit against Letitia James and Kathy Hochul at the time of her announcement, suggesting that the actual filing may not have taken place yet.

Some critics asserts that this has made the whole scene appear to be a political theater for a publicity stunt. 

As it is, it is essential to recognize that New York operates as a sanctuary state, implementing policies designed to protect undocumented immigrants and limit collaboration with federal immigration enforcement.

It is also worth noting that several states also grant undocumented immigrants the ability to obtain driver’s licenses, not just New York.

The realization that New York is not the only state that grants licenses to immigrants could complicate the legal framework surrounding lawsuits like the one Bondi has proposed.

Should Bondi’s lawsuit be filed, it is likely to encounter substantial legal obstacles due to these sanctuary policies and the protections they afford.

The resolution of such a lawsuit would hinge on various elements, including the particulars of the case and the courts’ interpretations of the applicable laws.

What is a Sanctuary City?

A sanctuary city is a city that adopts policies to limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement actions to protect undocumented immigrants from deportation. These cities aim to foster trust between local law enforcement and immigrant communities, ensuring that immigrants can report crimes and access public services without fear of deportation.

Constitutional Protection and State Rights.

Sanctuary cities are not explicitly protected under the U.S. Constitution. However, they operate under the principles of federalism, which allows states and local governments to have certain powers and responsibilities independent of the federal government. This means that states and cities can pass laws and policies that reflect their local priorities and values, even if they differ from federal policies.

Role of Amendments.

Critics assert that the framers of the Constitution designed the amendment process to empower states in shaping federal law.

This design ensures that states can protect individual rights and address local concerns without undue interference from the federal government.

The Tenth Amendment, for example, reserves powers not delegated to the federal government for the states or the people.

Amendments to the Constitution can also play a significant role in protecting individual rights and addressing issues like immigration.

For instance, the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law, which can be interpreted to support policies that protect immigrants from discrimination and ensure their rights are respected.

Critics’ Perspective.

As Pam Bondi continues to turn her office into a theatrical avenue for publicity stunts, it is worth noting that sanctuary cities operate within the framework of federalism and state rights, allowing them to implement policies that reflect their local values and priorities.

The amendment process ensures that states have a voice in shaping federal law and protecting individual rights.

Some experts on public policy assert that an intelligent person, particularly in Pam Bondi’s caliber as an AG representing the government, should have understood the difference between state laws and federal laws and why they are critical to protect the rights of everyday people in each state of the United States.

Each state in the United States, for example, has the autonomy to enact its own policies and laws, such as sanctuary city policies, which are designed to protect their residents and reflect local values and priorities.

These policies often aim to shield undocumented immigrants from federal immigration enforcement and promote trust between local law enforcement and immigrant communities.

Federalism allows states to have certain powers and responsibilities independent of the federal government.

This balance is meant to protect individual rights and prevent the federal government from overreaching its authority.

So, if Pam Bondi or any government representative is challenging state policies like sanctuary city laws, they need to consider the legal principles of federalism and the state’s right to enact such policies.

This understanding is crucial for any legal challenge to have a bearing.

It remains to be seen whether this lawsuit, if ever filed, will achieve much in Pam Bondi’s attempt to challenge state rights and sanctuary city policies.