New AG Pam Bondi FREEZES all federal funding to sanctuary cities

It's already been established they can't do that. A judge will have it shot down within hours.
:laughing0301: :laughing0301:you keep saying that.....but they keep ignoring you.
 
Pam Bondi does not have the power to freeze any funds not directly coo trolled by the Justice Dept.
Nor does she have the authority to freeze money already appropriated by Congress.

So, if any aid is being frozen, it’s most likely to be aid to local law enforcement.

But she is following her boss’ example.

Making wildpronouncements like this that will turn into nothing other than a means to entertain the Trump knuckledraggers for another day.
Care to bet? Oh look, you already lost!
 
Nothing ventured, nothing gained. Win or lose? fifty fifty. lol. :)

👉 Potential legal challenges to Bondi's policies are here:

  • Sanctuary Cities and Federal Funding: Concerns exist regarding the legality of withholding federal grants from sanctuary cities, particularly in relation to the Tenth Amendment, which is meant to protect states and localities from federal overreach[8].
  • First Amendment Issues: As attorney general, Bondi opposed halting the Florida Constitution Revision Commission’s proposal of multiple amendments on the November 2018 ballot, and challengers of this proposal argued that it violated the First Amendment rights of voters by improperly bundling issues that should be considered separately[2].
  • Conflicts of Interest: Critics have questioned whether Bondi will bring a "transactional philosophy" to the Justice Department, given her history of taking "donations and free travel" from targets of potential investigations when she was Florida’s Attorney General[3].
  • Voting Rights: Bondi's actions and statements following the 2020 election, specifically her fueling of unfounded claims about voting conspiracies and election fraud, raise concerns about her devotion to the rule of law[1].
  • Independence of the DOJ: There are concerns that the DOJ would terminate career lawyers just for disagreeing with the administration’s policies, given Bondi’s longtime fidelity to Trump and her work to further his political agenda through her work at AFPI[1].
  • Prosecutorial Discretion: A memo from Bondi stated that prosecutors could face firings if they refuse to sign onto briefs or appear in court to argue on behalf of the administration, raising concerns about the independence of prosecutorial decision-making[4][7].

sources:
[1] Oppose the Nomination of the Honorable Pamela Jo Bondi To Be Attorney General of the United States
[2] Pam Bondi’s record on newsgathering, First Amendment issues
[3] Trump Installs Project 2025 Lawyer as Attorney General - Democrats
[4] New attorney general orders review of Trump cases as she takes over the Justice Dept.
[5] https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/05/politics/pam-bondi-attorney-general-first-day/index.html
[6] Bondi orders review of Trump cases after being sworn in as attorney general
[7] New Attorney General Pam Bondi orders review of Trump cases as she takes over the Justice Department
[8] Bondi to Probe DOJ Weaponization, Target 'Sanctuary' Cities (1)

👉 Given Pam Bondi's record and previous legal challenges, here's how the U.S. Supreme Court might view her decisions:

  • Challenges to the Affordable Care Act (ACA): The Supreme Court previously rejected a challenge to the ACA that Bondi supported, and later dismissed another challenge on procedural grounds[1]. This history might make the court skeptical of future challenges to healthcare laws supported by Bondi.
  • Voting Rights: Bondi's actions following the 2020 election, and her involvement with the America First Policy Institute (AFPI) in lawsuits that critics say would disenfranchise voters, could be scrutinized, especially given the court's past rulings on voting rights[2]. The Supreme Court has rejected claims made by Bondi regarding the 2020 election[2].
  • Sanctuary Cities and Federal Funding: There are concerns about the legality of withholding federal grants from sanctuary cities, particularly in relation to the Tenth Amendment, which is meant to protect states and localities from federal overreach.

The Supreme Court's composition and views can evolve, influencing its approach to legal questions. :)

sources:
[1] MEMO: Civil Rights Are at Stake with Pam Bondi's Nomination
[2] Oppose the Nomination of the Honorable Pamela Jo Bondi To Be Attorney General of the United States
[3] DOJ Will Defend The Constitutionality Of The FCA Under Pam Bondi
[4] https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/pr...-trumps-pick-to-be-attorney-general-pam-bondi
[5] https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/pam-bondis-recent-history-troubling-doj
[6] https://www.justsecurity.org/106313/questions-pam-bondi-attorney-general/
[7] https://www.legaldive.com/news/trum...aga-loyalty-conservative-legal-record/733750/
[8] https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-451_7m58.pdf
 
Funny how all these "Sanctuary Cities" are only a sanctuary until illegals show up in their town. Then they get bumrushed out inside of 24 hours like at Martha's Vinyard.

Virtue signaling is all they are. And the idiot Dimtard Cult eats it up .
 
The biggest technical action thus far!
 
Pam Bondi does not have the power to freeze any funds not directly coo trolled by the Justice Dept.
Nor does she have the authority to freeze money already appropriated by Congress.

So, if any aid is being frozen, it’s most likely to be aid to local law enforcement.

But she is following her boss’ example.

Making wildpronouncements like this that will turn into nothing other than a means to entertain the Trump knuckledraggers for another day.
Well you seemed to think that Biden as a VP had the authority to freeze funds voted to Ukraine aid. Remember his open statements on TV to that fact? What's good for the democratic goose is good for the republican gander.
 
How is this going to hurt the sanctuary cities anyhow? These are all liberal utopias that love high taxes. They can just raise their tax rates.
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom