A lawyer looks at Donald Trump’s action on “sanctuary cities” and finds it to be–er–of questionable legality. A snippet (this is one of the milder bits):
The much-discussed “stick” to all of this is Trump’s threat to pull “federal funding” from “sanctuary cities.” What constitutes a “sanctuary city” for the purposes of losing their funding? Only Trump knows. I’m not being flip. There’s no legal definition of what constitutes a sanctuary city, so it can be pretty much whoever is pissing Trump off at that moment. New York and San Francisco, sure, we already know we’re in the opening week of a four-year war of orange aggression. But freaking Topeka could be on this list if they don’t cheer loud enough when Trump is in need of adulation.