This is a tale of two (sets of) walls. One wall is begging for funds. The other walls are being firmed up, at least temporarily, by a San Francisco, (if not a 9th circuit), court decision. The same people who want to tear down the wall that is now begging for funds, are the ones who cheer when the set of other walls gets buttressed by a judge’s decision. And yes, those who wish to strengthen the begging wall are the same people who would like the DOJ and the Trump administration in general to tear down the set of other walls.

It’s an apt description to call the southern border the begging wall. People begging to get in is the image the other-wallers would like to project when the public thinks of illegal immigrants, sneaking or being smuggled across the southern border. And the other-wallers (like mayors in San Francisco and Los Angeles and let’s not forget Chicago, among other cities) love it that the begging-wallers have to hope that funds can be raised in Congress. A hope that is looking much less likely at mid-week with the stop-gap funding running out on Friday.

It looks like the Trump administration has given up – for now at least – on getting what is a very low sum of money when considering federal budget numbers in the temporary budget deal, in order to shore up the southern border with things like fencing and additional border personnel.

What’s left is talk that the GOP is trying to get a trade-off getting some additional money for border security (GOP members of Congress say it’s in there; Democrats say it isn’t) in exchange for keeping the subsidies to insurance companies for covering money-losing customers (the CSR or Cost-Sharing Reductions). So yet another feature of Obamacare is being accepted by Congress while what amounts to pennies on the dollar for some non-wall types of border security are ushered into the budget deal disguised with wigs and masks.

Clearly the GOP could not get enough, or even any, moderate Democrat Senators to agree to funding for a border wall. I’m sorry, that would be moderate GOP senators as well.

And a San Francisco federal court judge, William Orrick, has ruled that the loss of funds resulting from President Trump’s executive order would cause sanctuary cities “to suffer irreparable harm absent an injunction.” So he did. Block the executive order that is. There will be an appeal, no doubt, but it is another (hopefully temporary) setback handed to the administration by the very liberal west coast circuit.

So where the money counts in the budget and where the lower courts are concerned, identity politics rules uber alle. Perceived discrimination by American border patrol or customs officials matters more than upholding the laws of the country. Cutting off funds because of a lack of cooperation by local police with ICE officers is a major pecado in the eyes of progressive judges. So. The begging wall will go begging. The other (set-of) walls around sanctuary cities will stay in place or even be raised further by municipal policy and lower court decisions, until the higher courts decide at some point in the future.

How dare conservatives ask for a wall, or for free speech? That’s only for liberals.

Comments