Although it is mostly academic, that statement is false.
Static friction is always equal to or higher than sliding friction:
One condition under which your statement is true is when the surface the vehicle on is loose. On loose material where the tire can push a pile of that material up in front of itself the resulting friction of the tire
*and* the material sliding together can be higher than the static friction available on the loose surface alone.On the road locking your wheels will always make the stopping distance longer than it needs to be. Many people are not good enough drivers to actually apply this maximum breaking force without locking the wheels. In their case your statement may also often be true for that combination of vehicle, road, and driver.
What modern ABS tried to do, to varying degrees of success, is hold the breaking force below the force required to cause the tire to slip. In actuality the tire does slip and the decrease in speed for that tire caused by the slippage is what the ABS sensor looks for to decide how much breaking force to use on each wheel.
However, the systems are a compromise. If you are in a turn for instance the outside wheels need to rotate faster, as do the rear. This means the outside rear is going significantly faster than the inside front. To permit this to happen a simple ABS system needs to allow for small differences in tire speeds. This makes those systems lock the wheels even more.
Very advanced systems in the newest cars have accelerometers to measure lateral acceleration in a turn as well as steering input sensors to determine how much you are turning the wheel. These systems do a much better job. Often they are marketed as 'stability control' because they can also control engine speed and apply breaking force to keep you on the correct track even if you don't apply the breaks yourself (such as when you come off a highway too fast on a decreasing radius turn and start to slide to the outside of the turn.)