NEW YORK CITY–File this one under “I.”

For Ironic.

Or to put it less politely: File this one under “A.”

For Audacious.

ı ı ı

New York City wanted to be, and announced itself as, as a “sanctuary city.”

Now, though, it says it can’t handle all who have recently arrived.

So does New York City want to transport those whom it says it can’t handle back to the places in the United States from which they traveled to New York City?

No, it wants to transport them to Western, Central, Northern, and Upstate New York, where it says it will put them up in hotels temporarily.

Because many such counties, including Chautauqua County, can’t handle such an influx–even if it’s only temporary, which is doubtful–they’ve taken steps to prevent it.

So New York City has filed suit in the state Supreme Court in New York County, meaning Manhattan, and has asked the court to force the counties to accept those whom New York City says it can’t handle.

ı ı ı

New York City’s court petition supports this by claiming:

¯ First, that the counties are preventing New York City from doing what state social-services law permits.

¯ Second, that the counties have violated (a) state public-accommodations law by discriminating against those whom New York City says it can’t handle “because of their ‘national origin, citizenship, or immigration status'” and (b) federal civil-rights law by discriminating against them “on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.”

¯ Third, that the counties have violated state law by undertaking their actions “without any rational basis to believe that any kind of disaster, catastrophe or true emergency was taking place or about to take place in the relevant jurisdictions. The prospect of a few hundred (people whom New York City says it can’t handle) being located temporarily in a hotel willing to take them–with (New York) City retaining fiscal responsibility, paying for lodging, and providing transportation, meals, and social services–cannot reasonably be described as a ‘public emergency,’ much less a public emergency that imperils public safety.”

¯ Fourth, that the counties have violated federal law by “attempt(ing) to regulate the residence of noncitizens solely based on their immigration status,” and

¯ Fifth, that the counties have violated the U.S. Constitution by abridging the right to travel within the state.

Well.

However else the counties respond, don’t be surprised if they–in addition to addressing the first and fifth claims–note that their actions are based on none of the factors in the second and fourth claims.

Those claims in effect call officials of the counties bigots. No one can truthfully doubt the harm that bigotry causes. Yet false charges of bigotry are harmful too. Anyone making such a charge needs to back it up or back off.

As for the third claim, consider this: The cost to the counties of accepting those whom New York City says it can’t handle extends way beyond “lodging, … transportation, meals, and social services.” Think, for example, of health care, schools, law enforcement, and courts.

Furthermore, “a few hundred” people–whatever that may mean–in a county of about 100,000 people is the population equivalent of “a few” tens of thousands in a city of about 10 million people.

“A few” extra tens of thousands appear from New York City’s court petition to be what New York City says it can’t handle.

Nevertheless, the third claim in effect seeks to foreclose counties from saying they can’t handle an influx.

ı ı ı

Apart from the merits of New York City’s claims is this simple point: New York City wanted to be a “sanctuary.”

It’s ironic–and yes, audacious–of New York City to ask the counties to bear any of the consequences that it has partly brought onto itself.

This would be ironic–and yes, audacious–even if New York City had contended in its court petition that any of the counties wanted to be a “sanctuary.”

Which New York City hasn’t contended.

Or even if New York City had urged the federal government to close the southern border.

To what extent has New York City done this?

After all, the opening of the southern border is the ultimate cause of what New York City says it can’t handle.

Dr. Randy Elf joins those seeing both irony and audacity in this lawsuit.

COPYRIGHT ç 2023 BY RANDY ELF