|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Names Sanctuary State follow immigration policy or their funding is at risk.
By Elyse Apel for The Center Square
Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser has joined a 20-state coalition and Washington, D.C., suing the Trump administration over restrictions it has put on Victims of Crime Act grants.
The funding in jeopardy, which has already been appropriated by Congress, totals more than a billion dollars.
The Justice Department has declared that states will not be able to access Victims of Crime Act funding unless they agree to support the administration’s immigration enforcement.
The lawsuit called these “unprecedented conditions.”
“Tying congressionally mandated funds for crime victim support to immigration conditions not authorized by Congress is wrong and an illegal overreach by the Justice Department,” said Weiser.
The Victims of Crime Act was first enacted in 1984. Administered by the U.S. Department of Justice, the grant programs help fund a wide variety of programs including victim and witness advocacy services, emergency shelter, crime scene cleanup, sexual assault forensic exams, and medical, funeral and burial expenses.
“Withholding these funds will retraumatize crime victims and survivors who are trying to pick up the pieces and rebuild their lives,” Weiser said. “And this stunning action by the administration does not make communities safer.”
In 2024 alone, Colorado’s Office for Victims Programs received over $21 million in funding from Victims of Crime Acts grants. Funding is distributed to states based on fixed statutory formulas.
To continue receiving the funding, Colorado must comply with immigration efforts by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
Colorado is joined on the lawsuit by New Jersey, California, Delaware, Illinois, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin and the District of Columbia.
Colorado has been a critical player in the coalition of Democratic states fighting against the many cuts pushed by the Republicans. So far, Colorado has joined or filed 35 lawsuits against the Trump administration.
Currently Colorado and its capital city Denver have been under scrutiny for their so-called sanctuary city policies, which limits their cooperation with federal immigration authorities.
Notably, Denver Mayor Mike Johnston joined four other sanctuary city mayors in testifying before a U.S. House Oversight and Government Reform committee in March on the issue, as previously reported by The Center Square.
More recently, the U.S. Department of Justice released a list of “states, cities, and counties identified as having policies, laws, or regulations that impede enforcement of federal immigration laws.”
Colorado and Denver were both on that list.
“Sanctuary policies impede law enforcement and put American citizens at risk by design,” said U.S. Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “The Department of Justice will continue bringing litigation against sanctuary jurisdictions and work closely with the Department of Homeland Security to eradicate these harmful policies around the country.”
Weiser is confident the lawsuit will be successful.
“We sued in the first Trump administration when it attempted a similar tactic with law enforcement grants, and we won,” he said. “I’m confident we’ll win again.”
Elyse Apel is a reporter for The Center Square covering Colorado and Michigan. A graduate of Hillsdale College, Elyse’s writing has been published in a wide variety of national publications from the Washington Examiner to The American Spectator and The Daily Wire.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Border, Court, National News
Oh how it must suck to be a Democrat right now ! I think it was probably a Democrat that said “elections have consequences” . Karma ?
Why have a program to assist crime victims if we are not going to shut off the policies of bringing in new criminals to the country? Democrats are big on slogans and mantras. How about the one saying “shut the barn door before rounding up the loose horses”?
Notice how we break down all stops to protect lawbreakers, fast, swift, decisive action?
But nothing, I mean nothing to even make it slightly more difficult for criminals and drug dealers to do business in Vermont?
Who in the VTGOP is even willing to publish a strongly worded letter? Huh……
Who in any form of leadership is speaking up?
So, it appears we have a publicly funded program to assist victims of crimes, while at the same time we use public money to assist criminals to commit additional crimes on top of the one or more they already committed and call it progress? Stopping this craziness is called authoritarian extremism? These 20, the same 20 States that file lawsuits on everything not from their Party seem to have lost their collective minds and enjoy wasting taxpayers money!
It’s up to “We the People “ to stand up, show up, and Speak up! How much criminal behavior and lawlessness is tolerable for Vermont citizens? Every one needs to let their town officials and legislative representatives know. They are not mind readers and many lack common sense. Make the effort to attend YOUR town council meetings and party meetings. Be a nobody. Everyone thought someone should do it but nobody did. Stand up, show up, speak up. Your families and neighbors safety is at risk.
The moonbats in DC, at least the well-educated, elderly, white ones, are standing up and speaking up screaming “let my people go” when law enforcement is arresting troublemakers. “We the people” in Vermont, at least the visible ones, are behaving similarly. It seems the Silent Majority is just sitting back, totally entertained by the self destructive behavior of the left, and just quietly smiling…
Headline fixed:
Vermont among 20 states suing Feds over the prosecutions of criminals
So the other day I read that the Governor wrote to AG Bondi to insist Vermont is not a sanctuary state, but today I read that Vermont is on a list of twenty sanctuary states suing the government over funding. I guess I’m a little confused. Does Vermont agree to enforce Federal immigration enforcement or not?
As Guy so aptly put it a few weeks ago:
“No government shekels without government shackles.”
In other words, if you want the Fed’s bennies, you must play by their rules.
Entitlement forgets that fact.
Or, don’t look a gift horse in the mouth.
Notice the 20 States all in unison suing the Feds for shutting off the spigot to their hog trough? Lawsuits cost money – money they claim they don’t have to pay for what really matters. Where does the money come from? Taxpayers – the same ones paying State/local taxes into all the hog troughs. The giant ponzi scheme is coming to an end – here’s why:
The USA debt currently stands at $37.2 Trillion and climbing. The current debt to GDP in the USA is 120.9%. For all the certified/licensed accountants, financial advisors, and State Treasurers out there – those numbers are grotesque and knowingly unsustainable. Yet, they keep lying and scamming with impunity.
All the debt-bundled bonds the States sell to fund the schools and the cities/towns means all that leveraging is the dagger poised to cut the cord on all funding. How many IOU’s does it take to collapse the global financial Tower of Babel? The taxpayers are on the hook for all of it all ready sold and they will shake us down for even more that we don’t have – it’s a lie, it is fraud, and it is beyond the pale. 40 years bonds? C’mon man!
No honor among thieves – yet, the show must go on.
Why is Vermont suing?? The governor just announced that the state is in complete compliance with federal immigration law. Seems like an awful waste of taxpayer monies. Lol.
“Why is Vermont suing?? Maybe AG Charity Clark has a credible answer to that question ? I said maybe .
To a minimum, appears she wants to be a hero of her Party and show herself in good light to Democrat bosses
The author of this story was very disingenuous to not point out the elephant in the room! Being that the immigration laws that Trump is tying to this funding is existing federal law! You could also call it common law, what is a sovereign nation without borders anyway? The headline is super misleading, it’s irresponsible journalism.
I realize this is a repost not written but VDC writers, still I think it needed to clarify comments from VDC added to the bottom.
Headline rewrite-Vermont and 20 States sue for permission to violate Federal Law
Re: “Colorado is joined on the lawsuit by New Jersey, California, Delaware, Illinois, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin and the District of Columbia.”
These are the States currently involved with the movement ‘Soft Secession’… a political maneuver where regions, states, or communities within a larger political entity (like the United States) seek greater autonomy or separation from centralized authority without formally declaring independence or engaging in violent conflict.
Indivisible Vermont, and its various local ‘grassroots’ franchises throughout the State, are local participants in this movement. Camel’s Hump Indivisible, Indivisible Mad River Valley, Indivisible Champlain Islands, Indivisible Calais, Bennington County Indivisible, are recent chapters.
Unlike “hard secession,” which involves a complete break to form a new sovereign entity (as seen in the U.S. Civil War), soft secession emphasizes decentralized governance, regionalism, or non-compliance with federal mandates while remaining within the broader national framework. It’s a push for practical separation through legal, cultural, or economic means, often driven by ideological or political divides.
Both Blue and Red States are following ‘Soft Secession’ practices. It is, in effect, what Federalism (State’s Rights) is all about. And while I fervently disagree with Vermont’s ‘Indivisible’ policies, I respect the institution of Federalism.
And what that means is, I will have to navigate Vermont’s Marxist waters or leave the State. So, for now at least, I have my political sextant, compass, and Jolly Roger at the ready.
“Drown me! Roast me! Hang me! Do whatever you please,” said Brer Rabbit. “Only please, Brer Fox, please don’t throw me into the briar patch.”
‘Jolly Roger’ – not to be confused, in any way, with Vermont’s Lt. Governor.
Indivisible = complete Astro turf.
Soft secession aka color revolution, aka subversion, aka troublesome organizer….all birds of a foul feather surely, surely no eagles among the group.
An expose on “indivisible” would not only be enlightening but also very entertaining, Guy, Paul, any takers..
It would seem that that we the Government should withhold these grants until those states work with the Feds to reduce Crime – hence Victims.
I mean that it is only common sense. We have seen that where ever the Feds have arrested and removed violent criminals/ illegal aliens forom the streets crime goes down, hence less victim to help.
I am restrained, by decorum, from using street terms from the Bronx to describe these intellectually challenged individuals.
The best money spent on crime victim advocacy is in promoting a credible law enforcement infrastrucure. It’s not complicated.