- Banned
- #61
That's nice...but that is NOT what the family sued over. Maybe they would have been better advised by their lawyer/lawyers if that had been what their filed.....but it isn't so they lose.It (sanctuary law) actually DOES violate federal law in that it is designed specifically to counteract federal immigration law and oppose it.The judges said city's policy did not violate federal law and that Mirkarimi had a right to enforce the memo.
It is no more legal than when Jim Crow governors blocked black children from trying to enter segregated public schools and soldiers with fixed bayonets had to escort those children into the schools.
Surprise! The 9th Circuit court got something else wrong. And saying sanctuary policy isn't stopping federal agents from doing their jobs, it just isn't helping them is specious b.s.!
Sanctuary policy is meant to aid and assist people who violate federal law and therefore breaks the law itself.
The distinction between not helping ICE agents and actually hindering them from applying the law, by cutting off all
communications and assistance between sanctuary cities, like San Francisco, and immigration agents is
patently absurd on it's face and the end result is the same....federal law is thwarted by sanctuary policy.
If you aren't ready to discuss the issue don't bother with a reply.