>>6800024 (pb) from notables
>-The Supreme Court ruling on “Gamble v United States”. It was decided on the 17th. [Q day] It was a case about double jeopardy, deciding if for purposes of prosecuting offenses if individual State’s and the United States are separate sovereign entities and therefore each able to each prosecute a defendant for the same crime. The Supreme court ruled THEY WERE!
>This has two affects
>1. After this ruling Trump immediately stated “millions of illegal aliens would be arrested next week”,
meaning the states claims of sanctuary are not valid with regard to federal statutes.
It seems to me (not a lawfag) that if the States are "separate sovereign entities", they can claim to be Sanctuary States by that very reasoning!
What am I missing??
If they can prosecute the same crimes concurrent w/ or irrespective of United States Gov, that means they are separate from the US Gov with regard to the law, it could (will) be argued; they can equally declare any laws/rules they want as Sovereign States.
Sharia law comes to mind.
(It also could be used to nullify Presidential pardons, as most crimes against the Fed are committed in a State)
Any clarification would be useful, as I am not cool with this ruling.