“10 Minutes Closer to Freedom”

This episode of Thoughts from Maharrey Head, I explain why the recent Federal District Court injunction on Pres. Trump’s “sanctuary city” was a big win for the Constitution.

Earlier this week, U.S. District Judge William Orrick slapped an injunction on Trump’s executive order relating to so-called sanctuary cities. The EO set the stage to punish cities that refuse to participate in immigration enforcement by withholding federal funding. Santa Clara County and San Francisco, California, challenged the EO in federal court on a number of grounds. Orrick agreed that the administration overreached and stopped enforcement of parts of the order.

Conservatives were outraged by the decision. Social media erupted with condemnation of Orrick and complaints about “liberal, activist judges.”

But in fact, at least one aspect of the judge’s decision was a huge win for the Tenth Amendment, separation of powers and an important legal principle known as the anti-commandeering doctrine.

In this episode of Thoughts from Maharrey Head, I break down with the judge’s ruling and explain why conservatives should cheer it as a victory for the Constitution. Along the way, I point out the danger of basing you constitutional principles on policy preferences.

You can subscribe to Thoughts from Maharrey Head for free on iTunes. Just click HERE.


The Anti-Commandeering Doctrine  – An overview

Thoughts from Maharrey Head #58: The Anti-Commandeering Doctrine

Sanctuary City Injunction a Win for the Tenth Amendment

Free E-Book – “The Power of No!”

Full Order Granting Motion to Enjoin