Federal funding should be withheld from "sanctuary jurisdictions" that refuse to enforce federal immigration laws. The author suggests that cutting off these funds would simultaneously reduce government spending and encourage compliance with immigration policies, citing a DHS list of over 600 such jurisdictions. The piece asserts that treating these jurisdictions differently from those violating other federal laws is inconsistent, and points to the significant financial reliance of many cities on federal funding as leverage. Ultimately, the author believes that financial pressure is the most effective way to compel these jurisdictions to adhere to federal immigration law, drawing a parallel to the impact of threatened funding on Harvard's antisemitism policies.

Samuel Carter’s Books

Get full access to Samuel Carter's Substack at therealsamuelcarter.substack.com/subscribe