The executive order is not illegal. It is, however, against the law to be here without documentation. Federal taxpayer funds should not be given to cities, counties or states that harbour law breakers.

HB 1076 in Texas prohibited local police from enforcing any Federal gun laws. I wonder if the people objecting to local police not enforcing Federal immigration laws objected to HB 1076. The point in both of these is that local communities are not responsible for enforcing Federal laws. In the case of immigration laws, it is widely held that some local residents avoid interacting with those who do enforce these laws and putting local police in that category makes the community less safe. It is important for people to feel safe reporting crime if you want less crime. It should be up to local communities to make that determination.

"It is, however, against the law to be here without documentation. Federal taxpayer funds should not be given to cities, counties or states that harbour law breakers."

It is also against the law, and far deadlier, to text while driving. Federal taxpayer funds should not be misspent busting up the families of peaceable workers our economy depends on while we allow lawbreaker texting drivers to maim and kill innocent citizens.

There are multiple visa programs that support immigrants working in the US. The H2A is for Farm Workers, and the H2B is for commercial workers. The contractor is expected to get the Visas for it's employees and must be OSHA compliant, provide ACA, and the minimum wage. These Visas are for people who will be working here for a number of months per year and are not looking for permanent residents. They go home to their families for part of the year. This is a very organized effort and usually the same people come back each year to the farms.
Given the number of complaints from the farmers they do not feel the need to legally cover their workers, nor the commercial companies. Possibly they are not OSHA compliant and cannot afford ACA for the workers. So the structure is in place but companies are not being expected to follow through with the legal approach to protect their workers. The County of Santa Clara needs to step up to the plate here and make sure that the people working here have the correct legal protections in place. The contractor or farmer is not held accountable for their poor management of their workers.

"Federal taxpayer funds should not be given to cities, counties or states that harbour law breakers."

So you would have no problem cutting off funds to members of the Trump administration, then?

The west coast states that are most vocal are the pot growing states that are dependent on Illegals to do the hard work in the fields and sorting. I view Oregon as a plantation state - it's main industries are wine and hemp. Washington has more diversity but is a pot growing state. In California you have the upper section which is growing pot and wine. Everything said about the old south plantations you can say about these areas. These people are slaves and treated as such. It is amazing that we have not progressed from those times - and note that these are Democrat stronghold states. These are rogue nation states. And you want to be congratulated on the "Values".

Article in SFC today - "Pot Taxes to fund police crackdown on illegal growers." This is in the state of Colorado - first to legalize pot. Despite the legalization of pot there is till a black market. The black market exists in smaller towns that do not have sufficient police enforcement. Problem is that the black market pot ends up in other states. The Colorado state is trying to pass a bill that would put better control on the illegal growing activity that gives legalization a bad name. There is also a black market in Oregon which they studiously ignore.
The U.S. Government allowed Colorado to legalize marijuana on the condition that it would not be sold in other states and it could ensure that criminal cartels at kept out of the growing business.
California has been growing pot all over the state on the assumption that it would soon be legal. Think again on that score - if a black market with cartel involvement becomes evident then the US Government can rescind the legalization. Is the fact that California wants to be a sanctuary state saying - in part - that any US involvement in the drug trade will be blocked?
How does that work for all of you? You are the citizen and the taxpayer.
Where do our next potential governors sit on this problem?

[Post removed.]

" Federal taxpayer funds should not be given to cities, counties or states that harbour law breakers."

Where do you think those "Federal taxpayer funds" come from? Popeye?

It's you and me getting back the taxes we pay each April, friend.