NYC lawmakers of both parties urge Trump admin to step in, tackle sanctuary laws
A bipartisan group of City Council members is urging Trump's Department of Justice to step in to overrule the Big Apple's sanctuary city laws, The Post has learned.
The council's Common Sense Caucus penned a letter to US Attorney General Pam Bondi on Monday asking to take legal action against New York City for its policies on illegal immigrants that limit cooperation between local law enforcement and the federal government.
'We understand the Department of Justice (DOJ), under your direction, is already suing the state of New York for violating federal statutes by impeding communication between state and federal authorities on immigration enforcement,' the caucus wrote in the letter obtained by The Post.
'We ask the DOJ to expand this legal action to include New York City's so-called 'sanctuary city laws,' which shield criminal aliens from federal immigration authorities, place the public at risk and severely undermine efforts by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and our own law enforcement agencies to coordinate on issues of national security.'
3 Attorney General Pam Bondi is being urged to expand her legal action against New York to include NYC.
Getty Images
The DOJ filed a federal suit against the Empire State in February targeting the 2019 'Green Light Law,' which allows illegal immigrants to obtain driver's licenses and bars the feds from accessing any of the state DMV data.
'Our Constitution specifically grants the federal government the power to establish laws to protect our borders and regulate immigration, and New York City cannot willfully ignore these laws,' said David Carr (R-Staten Island), who led the effort.
'I believe the courts would side with the Department of Justice in a lawsuit to compel local authorities to comply with federal law enforcement agencies like ICE, and AG Bondi is the right person to lead this effort.'
The city started rolling out its pro-immigrant policies in 2011, when it enacted a ban on detainer requests from ICE unless they come with a judicial warrant and the person had been convicted of serious crimes within the prior five years.
3 David Carr (R-Staten Island) led the charge on the legal action.
Paul Martinka
Over the next few years, five more laws were put on the books restricting the coordination between the New York City Police Department and the city's Department of Correction.
The group of lawmakers, who have repeatedly tried to roll back the laws, claims the 'reckless, ill-conceived policies' are a threat to New Yorkers.
'These so-called 'sanctuary city' laws are only giving sanctuary to dangerous criminals who prey on New Yorkers,' said Council Minority Leader Joann Ariola (Queens). 'That's why we've been fighting for years to repeal them. Now that we have a President and a federal administration that actually prioritizes the safety of Americans, we are hoping that can finally happen.'
3 The Council Minority leader Joann Ariola believes the current federal administration will help overturn the laws.
Michael Nagle
Trump-friendly Mayor Eric Adams has repeatedly stood by the laws, arguing that they actually make the city safer.
'We tell you, if you are a victim of a crime, call the police and report it. We tell you that if you need medical attention, go to the hospital and get that medical attention,' the Dem mayor said during a radio appearance last month.
The DOJ did not respond for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
26 minutes ago
- CBS News
Blue state governors to testify on "sanctuary policies" amid L.A. protests over immigration raids
Washington — Three Democratic governors are defending their responses to the migrant crisis and dispute claims of failing to cooperate with federal authorities, according to prepared remarks that will be delivered Thursday before a House oversight panel. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz are among the witnesses scheduled to testify before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on so-called "sanctuary policies". "Let me be clear: Sanctuary policies don't protect Americans. They protect criminal illegal aliens," Oversight Chair James Comer, a Kentucky Republican will say in his opening statement. The governors' appearances come as President Trump and California Governor Gavin Newsom remain embroiled in a legal and political standoff over the deployment of the National Guard troops and Marines to quell immigration protests in Los Angeles. Demonstrations have spread to other U.S. cities, including New York and Chicago following a series of deportation raids. "Minnesota is not a sanctuary state," Walz will tell lawmakers. "It is ridiculous to suggest that Minnesota — a state that is over 1,500 miles away from the Southern border and a thousand miles from lawmakers in Washington, D.C. who decide and implement border policy is somehow responsible for a failure of immigration enforcement." The former vice presidential candidate has drawn intense scrutiny not only over immigration policy but also for his handling of social justice protests that broke out in Minneapolis following the death of George Floyd in 2020. Trump administration officials have cited Walz' actions to justify the president's decision to federalize troops in California. While Walz does not appear to directly address the controversy in his testimony, he says he is "disappointed" in the federal government's overall approach. "As governor of Minnesota, it is incumbent on me to use the state's resources to help Minnesota families—not turn those resources over to the administration so they can stage another photo-op in tactical gear or accidentally deport more children without observing due process," Walz is set to say. Ahead of the hearing, the GOP-led panel released a video compilation of various news clips accusing the governors of "shielding" undocumented immigrants and "causing chaos" in their states. A memo from Hochul's office suggested the hearing could be "derailed by wild accusations" and "twisted characterizations" but noted the governor's position is "clear" when it comes to supporting strong borders and comprehensive immigration reform. "New York state cooperates with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in criminal cases," Hochul says. "And our values as New Yorkers demand that we treat those who arrive here in search of a better life with dignity and reject policies that tear law-abiding families apart." Hochul also addresses the influx of more than 220,000 migrants to New York City since early 2022, many of whom were bussed from border states, calling it "an unprecedented humanitarian crisis." "We have responded to this crisis with both compassion and pragmatism," Hochul states."And as a result, we largely prevented what could have become an additional crisis — one of street homelessness and tent cities." Pritzker says Illinois also stepped up to the challenge, and blamed the lack of federal intervention and cooperation from border states for exacerbating the problem. "As governor, my responsibility is to ensure that all Illinoisans feel safe in their homes, their businesses, and their communities," Pritzker is prepared to say. "That is why my administration continued to make significant investments in public safety, even as our resources were strained because of the lack of federal support during the crisis — expanding our state police force and investing in efforts to reduce gun violence." Thursday's session follows a March hearing on sanctuary cities with four Democratic mayors: Eric Adams, of New York, Mike Johnston of Denver, Brandon Johnson of Chicago and Michelle Wu of Boston. Comer launched an investigation in January into "sanctuary jurisdictions", including states, counties or cities, to examine their impact on public safety and federal immigration enforcement. President Trump has vowed to crack down on localities that don't back his immigration agenda. Earlier this month, the Department of Homeland Security removed its list of sanctuary jurisdictions after several cities challenged the findings.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Republicans lay groundwork for ‘total tax cliff' at end of Trump's term
Congressional Republicans are laying the groundwork for a tax cliff at the end of President Trump's term in office. While the conference is pushing to make the 2017 Trump tax cuts permanent, additional measures geared toward working-class Americans are being slated for expiration at the end of 2028. 'It means that's going to be an issue in the next presidential race,' House Freedom Caucus Chair Andy Harris (R-Md.) said Tuesday. The major expiring tax breaks in the House-passed version of Republicans' domestic agenda bill are boosts in the standard deduction, the deduction for seniors, and the child tax credit, along with the cancellation of taxes on tips, overtime pay, and car loan interest. Budget hawks are saying this sets up a 'tax cliff' in the legislation similar to the one Republicans are now trying to surmount, since most of the 2017 Trump tax cuts expire at the end of this year. 'There's a total tax cliff in there. There's about $1.5 trillion worth of taxes that expire in four years, five years, which means what? In five years, they'll just keep them going. This is why we end up with the same problem,' Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) said last week. 'It is 100 percent a gimmick to have tax cuts that you're putting in place for four or five years,' he added. The legislation is likely to undergo substantial changes in the Senate, including a change in the accounting baseline that will allow trillions of dollars worth of deficit additions coming from the extension of previous tax cuts to be ignored. But senators are sounding open to maintaining the split between making the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) permanent and allowing the additional cuts for workers, families, retirees and consumers to expire. 'The general feeling of Senate Finance is the TCJA — we need to make that permanent. We need to make the business provisions — the expensing, the R&D provisions — we need to make those permanent. The other things, I think we should discuss it,' Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), a member of the Senate Finance Committee, said last week. Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) stressed the objective of overall permanence while saying the additional cuts could be subject to change. 'Our intent is to make the tax cuts permanent. Now, something like the child tax credit, with a huge transfer payment aspect to it, I'd have to say that's something I'd have to check on. Other tax cuts and reductions, depending on score and how the votes come down, that could change,' he said last week. The expiring cuts are mostly ones that were proposed by President Trump while he was on the campaign trail. They appealed to various constituencies and came fast and furious in the run-up to the election. Seven different targeted tax proposals were floated in September and October, according to a tally by news agency Reuters. Trump proposed making auto loan interest fully deductible at a speech in October in Detroit, the capital of the U.S. auto industry. He pitched getting rid of taxes on tips in June in Las Vegas, Nev., a battleground state with an enormous hospitality sector. He proposed a tax credit for family caregivers at a rally at Madison Square Garden in New York, a state where more than 4 million people take care of loved ones. Many in the policy establishment — both left-leaning and right-leaning — view Trump's additional cuts as ancillary, if not altogether undesirable. 'I would prefer those things would be completely off the list,' Daniel Bunn, president of the Tax Foundation, a conservative think tank in Washington, told The Hill in November. 'It's not good policy. It does not move in the same direction that the 2017 reforms work.' William Gale, co-director of the more liberal Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, wrote in a commentary last year that canceling taxes on tips was a bad idea. 'The obvious problem is that the proposals are inconsistent with sound tax policy. The less obvious problem is that exempting tips would not even help the vast majority of low-income workers,' he wrote. While senators sound open to keeping the division between permanent and temporary tax cuts, they're also wary about creating another tax cliff that is likely to factor into political debates in the future. 'They're doing that for only four years, and all of a sudden that stops? I'm not real high on tax policy that expires,' Johnson said of the no-tax-on-tips provision. 'If it's good enough to include, let's make it permanent. Let's have that discussion.' The Senate has a lot more room to work with than the House since its budget baseline for the bill could allow about $5.5 trillion in expiring tax cuts to be left out of the accounting. However, conservatives in both chambers have expressed concerns about the potential deficit impact of the GOP bill, which has rattled financial markets and spurred a sell-off in the bond market. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated last week that the House's version of the plan would add $2.4 trillion to the nation's deficits over roughly the next decade. In a follow-up analysis requested by Democrats, Congress' official budget scorer estimated additional interest costs resulting from the plan would amount to $551 billion over a decade — a change that would 'increase the cumulative effect on the deficit to $3.0 trillion.' While top Republicans have sought to discredit the CBO's scoring of the measure, there has been distress in both chambers, as well as the White House, over the overall cost and the fact that it is projected to grow the economy by just 0.03 percent. The Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) estimated that the bill would grow the economy from 1.83 percent to 1.86 percent over the long run, representing little change from the Federal Reserve's latest prediction of 1.8 percent made prior to the passage of the legislation in the House. 'The Democrat inspired and 'controlled' Congressional Budget Office (CBO) purposefully gave us an extremely low level of growth, 1.8 percent over 10 years — how ridiculous and unpatriotic is that!' Trump wrote on social media earlier this month. One of JCT's models shows the legislation reducing U.S. capital stock by 0.9 percent over the budget window, leading to an overall decrease in economic output. 'The first and second half effects result in a decrease of 0.1 percent on average over the entire budget window,' JCT found. Democrats have seized upon the expiring cuts that Trump proposed as evidence that the bill is skewed toward the wealthy — though lower income tax rates for lower earners will be made permanent as part of the bill. 'Why is this bill designed to take away some of the benefits that you claim people are going to have?' Rep. Gwen Moore (D-Wis.) asked Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent during a hearing Wednesday. 'The senior tax credit expires … No taxes on tips expires.' Despite locking in lower tax rates for lower earners, forecasts project the House-passed tax bill will benefit higher earners more and will redistribute wealth from the bottom to the top of the income spectrum. Half of the bill's passthrough deduction alone, which was worth more than $200 billion in 2022, went to the top 1 percent of taxpayers by adjusted gross income, according to the JCT.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Why everyone from Musk to Wall Street is worried about U.S. debt payments
The Republicans' "big beautiful" budget package is uniting everyone from Elon Musk to Wall Street over an issue that experts say could pose a threat to the nation's long-term fiscal stability: The rising cost of servicing the U.S. government's growing mountain of debt. The U.S. spent $1.1 trillion in interest on its debt in 2024 — almost double the amount it was paying five years ago, according to Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis data. The nation now spends more on interest payments than it does on defense, data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute shows. Those costs could rise even more under the Republican tax and spending bill now being considered in the Senate, according to a June 5 analysis by the Congressional Budget Office. The version of the tax bill passed by the House last month is projected to increase the federal deficit — the gap between what the federal government spends each year and what it collects in revenue — by $2.4 trillion over the next decade, the nonpartisan agency found. That would require the government to raise additional debt, resulting in additional interest payments of about $550 billion over the next decade, the CBO forecasts. By 2035, interest on the nation's debt could reach $1.8 trillion, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a nonpartisan think tank focused on fiscal issues. "The interest costs now are bigger than defense spending, which is an extraordinary," Chris Edwards, an expert on federal tax issues at the Cato Institute, a libertarian-leaning think tank, told CBS MoneyWatch. "The budget threat here is that all of these increasing federal interest costs will crowd out all the other priorities in the federal budget that the policymakers want to spend on." In other words, the federal government could struggle to support vital programs like Social Security as a larger share of its budget is eaten up by interest payments on the nation's swelling debt. Federal interest payments as a share of the nation's gross domestic product stood at 3% last year, according to Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis data. If current trends holds, that could rise to 4.1% of GDP by 2035, the nonpartisan Peter G. Peterson Foundation estimates. This embedded content is not available in your region. !function(){"use strict"; 0!== e= t in r,i=0;r=e[i];i++)if( d= Democrats have pointed to analyses showing the bill's tax cuts will benefit wealthier Americans far more than low- and middle-income workers while also adding to the national debt. "No single piece of legislation in my time here in Congress will do more to add to the national debt than this one," Rep. Brendan Boyle, a Democrat from Pennsylvania who voted against the legislation, said last month on the House floor. Many Republicans, however, point to the bill's proposed tax cuts as providing an avenue for economic growth. "We are going to celebrate a new golden age in America," House Speaker Mike Johnson said last month after the bill passed in the House. Concerns from Elon Musk, Wall Street The cost of paying for the nation's debt has drawn concern from many corners, including Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who earlier this month posted about it on social media as he voiced his objections to the GOP bill. "Congress is spending America into bankruptcy!" Musk posted on June 5, pointing to data showing that interest payments have risen from $416 billion in 2014 to more than $1 trillion in 2024. Moody's Ratings downgraded U.S. credit last month, citing among its reasons the mounting concerns about the nation's increasing debt load and interest payments. "Successive U.S. administrations and Congress have failed to agree on measures to reverse the trend of large annual fiscal deficits and growing interest costs," the credit rating agency said. "Over the next decade, we expect larger deficits as entitlement spending rises while government revenue remains broadly flat." Moody's added, "In turn, persistent, large fiscal deficits will drive the government's debt and interest burden higher." On June 7, the White House said in a memo that the GOP tax bill "significantly improves our nation's fiscal trajectory by including $1.7 trillion in mandatory savings," while President Trump's tax cuts will spur economic growth. Some economic forecasters project that Mr. Trump's tariffs will drag down U.S. growth. The nation's growth could slide to 1.6% in 2025 and 1.5% next year partly because of those import levies, a sharp reduction from the 2.8% growth recorded last year, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development said last week. How did interest payments get so big? In recent years, interest payments on the federal debt have ballooned for two main reasons. First, a series of COVID-related spending bills provided $4.6 trillion to individuals and businesses to help them keep afloat during the pandemic, with much of that financed through new debt. Second, the Federal Reserve started hiking interest rates in March of 2022 to tame high inflation. But that also meant the Treasury Department needed to pay higher rates to bondholders, adding to the cost of servicing the nation's burgeoning debt. In 2020, the U.S. had about $27 trillion in outstanding debt, according to Treasury data. By 2024, that had jumped 32% to $35.5 trillion. Over that time, the Fed's benchmark interest rate rose from close to zero percent to a high of more than 5% in 2024. One reason the Republican budget bill is forecast to increase the deficit — and add to the nation's interest costs — is that it would extend President Trump's 2017 tax cuts, as well as add other breaks, such as eliminating taxes on worker tips and overtime pay. Altogether, those tax cuts will cost $3.75 trillion, the CBO estimates. The revenue loss would be partially offset by nearly $1.3 trillion in reduced federal spending elsewhere, namely through Medicaid and food assistance. But that still leaves a significant funding gap. In the meantime, the U.S. could face a financial strain in servicing its debt, especially in the face of an economic slowdown, experts have warned. "The most dangerous scenario is that the giant size of our debt precipitates a U.S., and even global, economic recession and financial crisis," Cato's Edwards told CBS MoneyWatch. "We saw this 15 or so years ago in Greece and some other European countries. That sort of crisis could be coming to the United States at some point, but no financial expert knows exactly when that's going to be." An accused woman skips her pedicure, kills her ex-husband Watch California Gov. Gavin Newsom's full speech on federal response to Los Angeles protests LAPD chief speaks out about deployment of military forces to anti-ICE protests
