It's not that states can necessarily protect from the federal government but they do have the right to not participate, even prohibit, the assistance by the fed.

Marijuana is a great example. It is a federal crime. 

States have legalized it. 

Federal agents can raid any dispensary in any state where it is legal. But the state would not assist.

As far as not doing it simply because a bunch of progressives might retaliate is nonsense. That isn't a proper justification of not protecting any right. 

 I see your point, and it's why we need broad coalitions working on these issues at all levels 

 Ture, and I don't think any of us have issues with working with folks on the left. 

I'm happy to do so when aligned on an issue. I've worked with the ACLU on speech issues, for example. Or banning red light cameras. I hate those things.

But, more of than not, they aren't philosophically aligned with the idea of something that is decentralized, not centrally planned. 

Granted, there are those under the GOP that are no better. But the percentage tends to be greater and the other side. 

 It all depends on the specifics of the policies states enact. A year ago I suggested a few with historical success of resisting federal monetary overreach: https://www.bitcoinbrief.io/california-civil-war-states-rights-resisting-cbdcs/