SouthernWorldwide.com – Students of American history might recall the nullification crisis of the 1830s, a period when South Carolina claimed the right to nullify federal laws within its borders.
President Andrew Jackson asserted federal authority, leading South Carolina to back down, and the crisis was peacefully resolved. The concept of states nullifying federal law was effectively laid to rest with the Civil War three decades later.
This notion was further diminished in the 1950s through Supreme Court rulings and President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s authorization for the National Guard to enforce federal law in Little Rock, Arkansas. However, for today’s progressive Democrats, a new front in the nullification debate has emerged, focusing on undocumented immigrants and “sanctuary” jurisdictions.
Across the nation, in sanctuary jurisdictions spanning from California to Virginia, state and local officials are declaring themselves exempt from federal immigration laws. These cities and states, all governed by Democrats, have implemented policies or ordinances that impede federal immigration enforcement within their territories.
These sanctuary jurisdictions forbid their law enforcement agencies from cooperating with or even communicating with federal immigration officials. Some, like Washington and Colorado, prohibit local jails from detaining undocumented immigrants beyond their release date, preventing federal authorities from taking them into custody safely. Officials in Minnesota are pushing for even more restrictions on how and where federal authorities can enforce immigration law within the state.
By offering refuge to undocumented immigrants, including those accused of violent crimes, child abuse, and drug trafficking, and by hindering federal authorities from safely enforcing immigration statutes, sanctuary jurisdictions are, in essence, declaring federal immigration law void within their boundaries.
The dispute over sanctuary jurisdictions is not merely an abstract legal argument. While the Constitution clearly establishes federal law as the supreme law of the land, Democratic appeals to states’ rights and the obscure legal concept of the anti-commandeering doctrine are insufficient.
At least one-third of Americans reside in localities that refuse to enforce federal immigration law. For these American citizens, the sanctuary policies enacted by progressive Democrats can have life-or-death consequences.
Consider Fairfax County, Virginia. The progressive prosecutor there, Steve Descano, campaigned on a promise to make charging decisions that would “avoid immigration consequences.” In December 2025, Descano’s office dropped assault charges against an alleged MS-13 gang member, releasing him despite a request from federal immigration authorities to detain the undocumented individual.
Just one day after his release, the gang member allegedly committed a murder. Had Fairfax County not been a sanctuary jurisdiction, and had Descano and local officials allowed immigration authorities to enforce federal law, this killing might have been prevented.
Sanctuary jurisdictions also put law enforcement officers at risk. In Denver, for instance, local authorities released an undocumented immigrant and suspected Tren de Aragua gang member instead of allowing federal immigration officials to take him into custody at a secure jail facility. When immigration officials attempted to apprehend the gang member on the street, he tried to flee and assaulted an officer. This assault on law enforcement could have been avoided.
Sanctuary policies act as a magnet for illegal immigration, encouraging foreign nationals to enter the country. As witnessed during the Biden Administration, a record number of undocumented immigrants surged across the border, knowing that if they reached a sanctuary jurisdiction, they could remain. An unknown number of undocumented immigrants, including criminals and terrorists, entered the United States during those four years.
The modern Democratic Party has become the party of open borders and unlimited illegal immigration. It is a party that demonizes federal law enforcement officers and defunds critical immigration law enforcement operations. It is, quite simply, a party that prioritizes the protection of undocumented immigrants over the safety of American citizens.
The nullification of federal law died with secessionists and segregationists decades ago. However, today’s progressive Democrats are reviving it to shield undocumented immigrants from federal immigration enforcement. This is wrong and undeniably dangerous. The sooner Democrats respect federal immigration law, the better it will be for the public safety of all Americans.
Baca juga di sini: Supreme Court: Mifepristone Access Remains Broad During Legal Battle
Republican Tom McClintock represents California’s 5th congressional district and is Chairman of the Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement.
