Blue States Sue to Block ICE, Citing Federalism

My friends, today’s show cut straight to the heart of a dangerous and dishonest argument now coming from the left.

Minnesota and Illinois are suing the federal government, not because immigration law is unclear, but because it is finally being enforced.

And to do it, they are wrapping themselves in the language of federalism and the Constitution, hoping Americans won’t notice the contradiction—or their duplicity.

Let’s be clear: immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility. That is not a conservative opinion. That is black-letter constitutional reality.

Yet for the first time in modern political history, blue states that have openly defied federal immigration law are suddenly claiming that the federal government is violating states’ rights by enforcing it. That alone should tell you something.

These lawsuits claim ICE is using the “wrong kind” of warrants, operating in the “wrong places,” and targeting the “wrong jurisdictions.”

But beneath the legal jargon is a simple truth: they do not want immigration law enforced at all. If they did, they would have done it themselves years ago. Instead, they built sanctuary policies, obstructed ICE, demonized federal agents, and told you the border was secure when it clearly was not.

What we are witnessing now is not a debate over process. It is a tantrum over outcomes. The law is being enforced, and the left cannot stand it.

For decades, non-enforcement was their silent policy—one that fueled chaos in cities, overwhelmed social systems, and fundamentally changed communities without the consent of the governed. Now that enforcement has returned, they’re calling it tyranny.

Federalism does not mean states get to nullify laws they dislike. The Tenth Amendment reserves powers not delegated to the federal government, but immigration is absolutely one of those delegated powers.

When states refuse to cooperate and then sue because enforcement happens anyway, that isn’t federalism. It’s defiance.

The irony is impossible to ignore.

These same politicians had no concern for federalism during COVID. They had no concern for liberty, due process, or constitutional limits when churches were closed, businesses were shuttered, and Americans were threatened for going to work. But now, suddenly, they care deeply about constitutional restraint—because the law applies to people they politically depend on.

This is why today’s fight matters. If states can sue to stop federal law enforcement simply because they oppose the law, then the Constitution becomes optional. And once that happens, liberty itself is optional.

The rule of law is either enforced or it is not. And when the federal government finally does what it is constitutionally required to do, the answer cannot be lawsuits, obstruction, and manufactured outrage. America was never meant to work that way.

Conservative, not bitter.
Todd

🎧 Listen to today’s Toddcast here.

⚖️ Immigration enforcement is a federal constitutional duty
🚨 Sanctuary policies force ICE into public confrontations
📜 Administrative warrants vs. judicial warrants explained
🏙️ Enforcement focuses where illegal immigration concentrates
🔥 Law enforcement is the real controversy

Most people treat this stretch of the year as dead time. But builders like you know it’s actually prime time. And with beehiiv powering your content, world domination is truly in sight.

On beehiiv, you can launch your website in minutes with the AI Web Builder, publish a professional newsletter with ease, and even tap into huge earnings with the beehiiv Ad Network. It’s everything you need to create, grow, and monetize in one place.

In fact, we’re so hyped about what you’ll create, we’re giving you 30% off your first three months with code BIG30. So forget about taking a break. It’s time for a break-through.

Start building for 30% off today.

My friends, this past weekend, Minnesota Congresswoman Ilhan Omar responded to the Somali daycare fraud scandal — and it was stunning.

On Face the Nation, she called President Trump’s pause of welfare payments a “PR stunt.” This after officials estimated more than nine billion dollars in suspected Medicaid fraud.

The administration simply paused payments until audits could be completed. That’s accountability — and it’s absolutely necessary.

Omar says this creates fear and chaos. But notice who she won’t blame: the people who allegedly broke the law, and the system that failed taxpayers. The villain is always the one enforcing the law.

These are your tax dollars. And allegedly, some even flowed to terrorist groups. 

When I say the Radical Left’s ideology is built on a godless, morally bankrupt worldview, this is exactly what I mean. And America deserves better.

My friends, for the first time in modern history, the left has discovered federalism.

Not because they respect it.

Not because they believe in it.

But because it’s suddenly useful.

Minnesota and Illinois are not defending states’ rights. They are defending defiance. They are dressing up obstruction in constitutional language, hoping Americans won’t notice that immigration enforcement has always belonged to the federal government.

This isn’t a dispute over authority. That was settled long ago. Even the Supreme Court made that clear when Arizona tried to enforce immigration law because Washington wouldn’t.

Now that Washington finally is enforcing it, the left cries foul.

Federalism doesn’t mean states get veto power over laws they dislike. It never has. And pretending otherwise doesn’t make it true.

For years, Americans were told leaders were “doing everything they could” about the border.

They weren’t.

They talked. They blamed Congress. They made excuses.

Now we see what trying actually looks like.

It looks like enforcement. It looks like resistance from sanctuary states. It looks like lawsuits, protests, and manufactured outrage—not because the law is unclear, but because it’s finally being applied.

And notice this: enforcing the law is called “retaliation”—as though applying the law in cities filled with illegal immigrants is somehow political punishment.

If enforcing the law harms your city, the problem isn’t enforcement. The problem is what you allowed to happen there to begin with.

This moment exposes the truth they tried to hide. The goal was never reform. It was always non-enforcement. And now that era is ending—and they don’t like it one bit.