quote:
well Obama was criticizing a statutory law

if CONGRESS passes this funding-withholding as a law, then the constitutional argument goes out the window

Not really. Congress cannot use it's spending power to compel state action. With the drinking age case, the withholding was only 5% and deemed related to highway safety. The restrictions would have to relate to the grant/program and the withholding cannot be so severe that it amounts to compulsion. So they can probably restrict DOJ grants, but once they start trying to withhold HUD funds and other stuff, they will likely run into problems.

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by SlowFlowPro

Simple Solutions to Complex Probs

Member since Jan 2004

424890 posts

Posted on 1/26/17 at 1:57 pm to NOFOX

quote:
The restrictions would have to relate to the grant/program and the withholding cannot be so severe that it amounts to compulsion

one key difference is compulsion vs criminality

if the feds make a law (if there isn't one already) that says a locality cannot receive federal grants if they violate local, state, or federal law, then that's 100% constitutional and outside of that test. that's how the statutory solution would get around these issues (the OP, iirc, is about EO action alone)

quote:
So they can probably restrict DOJ grants, but once they start trying to withhold HUD funds

i think as of now it's just immigration-related funds, which are directly related to immigration enforcement

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by Dale51

Member since Oct 2016

32378 posts

Posted on 1/26/17 at 2:10 pm to NOFOX

quote:
So they can probably restrict DOJ grants, but once they start trying to withhold HUD funds and other stuff, they will likely run into problems.

Thats an arguable position. Cut the funding and let the states/cities fight the feds in court.

0 ...

Report Post

Political Talk - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board