Ray From Cleveland
Diamond Member
- Aug 16, 2015
- 97,215
- 37,438
- 2,290
Apples and oranges. What DumBama sued for is that Arizona created their own immigration regulations. This is entirely different. These are regulations that have been on the book for decades, and the feds give their blessing to local authorities that do as they ask.
The feds cannot make local authorities enforce their law, but the state or county can. If it's required by them to follow federal guidelines, not doing so means they are not doing their job and probably subject to termination. The person who signs your paycheck makes the rules.
The state or county has no immigration laws that they can force a municipality to enforce, Ray, and they have no legal authority to force municipalities to enforce federal law.. Do I really have to point that out to you?
No, they can't. But what's happening in Texas is something they can do. If the state creates a law or requirement of working with the feds, you work with the feds. If you don't, your municipality may be subject to losing state funds. If they want to lose those funds, fine, do what you like. But don't complain about the results.
And what happened to all the hoopla of them throwing city mayors in jail? And for what, exactly? City officials have been complaining for decades that the feds don't even reimburse them for incarcerating immigration suspects. Is the state going to throw mayors and the city council in jail for failure to spend city taxpayer money to enforce federal laws? If I were a Sheriff's Aucillary Volunteer in Texas, would they throw me in jail for failure to report a suspected wetback? And, finally, how long would that stand before the Supreme Court ruled that states have no authority to penalize cities for failure to enforce federal law?
If the state creates a law stating that local authorities are to work with ICE or any immigration federal authorities, and you disobey the law, then you pay the penalty for breaking the law no different than a DUI offender.
It doesn't cost a city anything to inform our federal agents they have a suspect in custody about to be released in a day or two. With Trump as President, he will make sure federal agents don't delay in getting those illegals that break the law out of their jails and into federal hands.
The activist judges that ruled Trump can't withhold funds from states or cities will be overturned by the Supreme Court. When that happens, your city or state risk losing funds for non-compliance. You don't think that a city or state has the authority to not allow that to happen?
Yeah, Trump has had such a good track record with the SC so far. He campaigned on deporting 12 million illegal aliens in 2 years, then backed down when he found out that he can't violate constitutional due process. Then he blocked immigration from 7 countries. Fail. Then he did it again. Fail again. Then he threatened to withhold money from sanctuary cities. Fail again. No state has ever done what Texas is trying to do, because the state does not have the authority to force anyone to enforce federal law. If I "harbor" an illegal alien, the feds can prosecute me. The state, county, or city may choose to hold me until the feds take custody, but there is no legal way that they can be forced to do it. If they could, Trump's attorneys would have already been working on making that happen. And you are flat wrong about it not costing the city anything to incarcerate federal suspects. Cities have been asking for reimbursement this for decades, and the feds have consistently refused to do it.
Sanctuary city - Wikipedia
"Following the passage of Arizona SB 1070, a state law, few if any cities in Arizona are "sanctuary cities." A provision of SB 1070 requires local authorities to "contact federal immigration authorities if they develop reasonable suspicion that a person they've detained or arrested is in the country illegally."[22] The Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates restrictive immigration policies, labels only one city in the state, South Tucson, a "sanctuary city"; the label is because South Tucson does not honor ICE detainers "unless ICE pays for cost of detention".[22]"
Of course they have in the past. Look who was in charge!
The Democrat goal is to make whites a minority in this country as soon as possible. If they can accomplish that, we will be a one-party government for eternity, or until minorities start voting majority Republican. So of course DumBama is going to give illegals as many breaks as possible and weaken our border (as he has) without looking too bad.
Don't count on rulings from activist judges to hold when these cases make their way to the Supreme Court. The feds can legally and constitutionally withhold funds from anybody they desire for any reason they desire. It's been used as a threat by Democrats multiple times in the past. As for stopping people coming here from selected countries, that has been a law passed by Congress and Senate for years now.