After Steinle verdict, Todd Rokita unveils bill to imprison officials who shelter illegal immigrants

[danielpalos]

Immigration is a federal problem since 1808.

It is really a problem now because the filthy Democrats want to let Mexico export their poverty to the US so that they can get more welfare queens to vote for them.

And, socialism on a national basis is the right wing solution.

We have a Commerce Clause.

We need a better visa program that generates revenue.

 

[mudwhistle]

I'm all for it. But why do we need a law that punishes them for doing something already against the law?

Since the feds seem hand tied by activist judges, from any action with real teeth.

I think we should take the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to prison for harboring fugitives.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Aren't you guys supposed to be all about federalism and state's rights?

 

[miketx]

Aren't you guys supposed to be all about federalism and state's rights?

Clearly you are all about letting illegals off scot free for murder.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Aren't you guys supposed to be all about federalism and state's rights?

Clearly you are all about letting illegals off scot free for murder.

Clearly, you're an emotional wreck who can't follow a conversation.

 

[BluesLegend]

The fact is officials in San Francisco shit their pants after this young woman was killed by this illegal they were protecting and it became national news.

 

[depotoo]

In this case, other states’ rights can be infringed upon by those sanctuary states. They do not follow those criminal illegal immigrants once they release them. They can cross borders easily. If they want to put up fences to keep them within their jurisdictions, then have at it!

Aren't you guys supposed to be all about federalism and state's rights?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

In this case, other states’ rights can be infringed upon by those sanctuary states. They do not follow those criminal illegal immigrants once they release them. They can cross borders easily.

Aren't you guys supposed to be all about federalism and state's rights?

How does that change the fact that you guys are currently cheering for what would be the biggest imposition on state sovereignty in the history of this country?

You are arguing that the federal government should have the power to demand that local officials follow federal law enforcement's orders, and be punished with jail time for failing to do so. You are, in effect, demanding that states be entirely subordinate to the executive branch.

 

[depotoo]

I am all for sovereignity. I would say we gladly forego it, if those states do not infringe upon all the others, by their laws.
It is a slippery slope, but everyone else’s sovereignty suffers from the continued disregard for laws on the books, by some states. They are not a nation unto themselves.

In this case, other states’ rights can be infringed upon by those sanctuary states. They do not follow those criminal illegal immigrants once they release them. They can cross borders easily.

Aren't you guys supposed to be all about federalism and state's rights?

How does that change the fact that you guys are currently cheering for what would be the biggest imposition on state sovereignty in the history of this country?

You are arguing that the federal government should have the power to demand that local officials follow federal law enforcement's orders, and be punished with jail time for failing to do so. You are, in effect, demanding that states be entirely subordinate to the executive branch.

 

[danielpalos]

I'm all for it. But why do we need a law that punishes them for doing something already against the law?

Since the feds seem hand tied by activist judges, from any action with real teeth.

I think we should take the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to prison for harboring fugitives.

Not enough guns involved, right wingers.

10USC246 is federal law. Need Sanctuary.

 

[ColonelAngus]

pass this bill. pass Kate's law. build Kate's wall.

After Steinle verdict, rep unveils bill to imprison officials who shelter illegal immigrants

Hey, buddy, you've milked this tragedy for all it was worth... time to find a new tragedy to milk.

ndeed, there is something wrong with the idea that we need to pass a new law as a backup to an existing law that isn't being enforced.

You are right. there is something wrong with that. The reason why the existing law doesn't work is because it's impractical.

But instead of fixing what doesn't work, you guys want to double down on what doesn't work.

You see, there's an easy way to fix the "Illegal" problem.

Step 1- Create a National ID Card system, with pictures and biometrics for every citizen.
Step 2 - Strictly enforce workplace rules. If the person doesn't have a national ID and you hire him, you face stiff fines.
Step 3- Create a Guest Worker program like the Germans have to bring in extra workers when needed.


But what we currently do is kind of nuts. We have all these jobs Americans don't want to do, and then act all surprised when people sneak into the country to take them.

All what jobs Americans dont want to do?

What job did Jose Ines Garcia Zarate have when he shot Kate Steinle?

 

[Flash]

The Corrupt Democratic Party’s Sanctuary Cities are illegal, racist and a giant F U to American Citizens

Also traitorous to the United States of America.

If Lincoln was President he would send in an Army to kill them.

 

[Flash]

I'm all for it. But why do we need a law that punishes them for doing something already against the law?

Since the feds seem hand tied by activist judges, from any action with real teeth.

I think we should take the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to prison for harboring fugitives.

Not enough guns involved, right wingers.

10USC246 is federal law. Need Sanctuary.

Only a stupid confused Moon Bat like you would claim we need to let Mexico import their poverty to the US in order to get more Democrat voters

 

[easyt65]

What job did Jose Ines Garcia Zarate have when he shot Kate Steinle?

'Illegal Alien'. That's a job Americans CAN'T do in this country.

 

[BrokeLoser]

In this case, other states’ rights can be infringed upon by those sanctuary states. They do not follow those criminal illegal immigrants once they release them. They can cross borders easily.

Aren't you guys supposed to be all about federalism and state's rights?

How does that change the fact that you guys are currently cheering for what would be the biggest imposition on state sovereignty in the history of this country?

You are arguing that the federal government should have the power to demand that local officials follow federal law enforcement's orders, and be punished with jail time for failing to do so. You are, in effect, demanding that states be entirely subordinate to the executive branch.

"You are, in effect, demanding that states be entirely subordinate to the executive branch."

NEGATIVE
That's your spin... The request is such that states are subordinate in ways that relate to the prosecution of federal criminals… Do you get it now?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

In this case, other states’ rights can be infringed upon by those sanctuary states. They do not follow those criminal illegal immigrants once they release them. They can cross borders easily.

Aren't you guys supposed to be all about federalism and state's rights?

How does that change the fact that you guys are currently cheering for what would be the biggest imposition on state sovereignty in the history of this country?

You are arguing that the federal government should have the power to demand that local officials follow federal law enforcement's orders, and be punished with jail time for failing to do so. You are, in effect, demanding that states be entirely subordinate to the executive branch.

"You are, in effect, demanding that states be entirely subordinate to the executive branch."

NEGATIVE
That's your spin... The request is such that states are subordinate in ways that relate to the prosecution of federal criminals… Do you get it now?

According to the Constitution, states are subordinate to the Judicial branch. That's already a given - if there had been a federal court order demanding that Zarate be held (a warrant or a subpoena), the SFPD would have had to hold him.

But that's not what you're demanding - what you're demanding is that states be subordinate to the whims of the executive branch. The President of the United States isn't a dictator, as much as you may wish him to be one.

The President is not in the chain of command of the SFPD. They don't answer to him, or to the FBI, or to INS.

 

[miketx]

I'm all for it. But why do we need a law that punishes them for doing something already against the law?

Since the feds seem hand tied by activist judges, from any action with real teeth.

I think we should take the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to prison for harboring fugitives.

Not enough guns involved, right wingers.

10USC246 is federal law. Need Sanctuary.

Loves him some American murdering criminals.

 

[danielpalos]

I'm all for it. But why do we need a law that punishes them for doing something already against the law?

Since the feds seem hand tied by activist judges, from any action with real teeth.

I think we should take the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to prison for harboring fugitives.

Not enough guns involved, right wingers.

10USC246 is federal law. Need Sanctuary.

Only a stupid confused Moon Bat like you would claim we need to let Mexico import their poverty to the US in order to get more Democrat voters

Typical right wing rhetoric. Nothing but repeal?

 

[danielpalos]

I'm all for it. But why do we need a law that punishes them for doing something already against the law?

Since the feds seem hand tied by activist judges, from any action with real teeth.

I think we should take the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to prison for harboring fugitives.

Not enough guns involved, right wingers.

10USC246 is federal law. Need Sanctuary.

Loves him some American murdering criminals.

LOL. Only the right wing never gets it.

10USC246 is federal law; don't be illegal to federal law.

 

[depotoo]

This has nothing to do with the executive branch. This is a bill, by congressional critters, that is being talked about.
There does have to be clarification within the laws as they exist, or new ones written, from what I gather. Sanctuary cities refuse to notify ice when they have illegal criminal aliens in their jurisdiction. How else would they know? Would we accept that from another state with a legal criminal? Even though they are being released for a lesser crime, but are a suspect in a murder in another state, just ‘oh, well, it’s not our responsibility to notify them’, even if they ask. Maybe not a perfect analogy, but I think you get my drift.

In this case, other states’ rights can be infringed upon by those sanctuary states. They do not follow those criminal illegal immigrants once they release them. They can cross borders easily.

Aren't you guys supposed to be all about federalism and state's rights?

How does that change the fact that you guys are currently cheering for what would be the biggest imposition on state sovereignty in the history of this country?

You are arguing that the federal government should have the power to demand that local officials follow federal law enforcement's orders, and be punished with jail time for failing to do so. You are, in effect, demanding that states be entirely subordinate to the executive branch.

"You are, in effect, demanding that states be entirely subordinate to the executive branch."

NEGATIVE
That's your spin... The request is such that states are subordinate in ways that relate to the prosecution of federal criminals… Do you get it now?

According to the Constitution, states are subordinate to the Judicial branch. That's already a given - if there had been a federal court order demanding that Zarate be held (a warrant or a subpoena), the SFPD would have had to hold him.

But that's not what you're demanding - what you're demanding is that states be subordinate to the whims of the executive branch. The President of the United States isn't a dictator, as much as you may wish him to be one.

The President is not in the chain of command of the SFPD. They don't answer to him, or to the FBI, or to INS.