Connecticut joins the Confederacy, declares themselves "sovereign" and independent of the United States

[Moonglow]

Alberta and Saskatchewan are 90% Conservative Party in the House of Commons.

Is that why they are broke?

 

[Thinker101]

I like to say "it's always 1860 in the Democrat party".

And they just keep proving me right. Lol

Sounds good. That's about $12.6 Billion dollars annually the feds can save.

 

[22lcidw]

We don't need or want a secret police in the USA.

You had a chance to get rid of Homeland Security, moderate the TSA and remove the Patriot Act and did not. You speak of ridding ICE. Of course, the rest will be needed to put any enraged Americans not Progressives in line when the time comes. There is little talk of this at all in D.C. So, the laws are mostly in place for a jackbooted future. And with surveillance, tracking, monitoring, hounding, and intrusion into people's privacy and civil liberties we see where this is going.

 

[M14 Shooter]

States can no more ban ICE officers from wearing masks as they can ban them from carrying guns and wearing body armor.

 

[citygator]

Perhaps someone should remind him the supremacy clause has existed for 250 years as well.

.

Connecticut is not claiming it can abolish ICE or stop federal immigration enforcement outright. That would lose immediately under the Supremacy Clause.

Instead, Connecticut is arguing it can regulate the manner in which law enforcement: including federal officers physically operating in Connecticut that engages the public, just like states regulate:

• use of force
• trespass
• assault
• impersonation
• licensing
• public safety conduct
• courtroom access
• state building access
• police identification rules

Their argument is: “You can enforce federal law here, but if you are doing it in our state, in public, while armed and detaining people, you do not get to behave like anonymous masked secret police.”

 

[citygator]

I like to say "it's always 1860 in the Democrat party".

And they just keep proving me right. Lol

Thread title is fake news. The debate is over operating in the state. Federal agents can’t break state laws to execute their job. If you are speeding on the job but not in some active pursuit… you are breaking a state law and subject to the penalties - a speeding ticket. That is well worn law.

 

[OKTexas]

Connecticut is not claiming it can abolish ICE or stop federal immigration enforcement outright. That would lose immediately under the Supremacy Clause.

Instead, Connecticut is arguing it can regulate the manner in which law enforcement: including federal officers physically operating in Connecticut that engages the public, just like states regulate:

• use of force
• trespass
• assault
• impersonation
• licensing
• public safety conduct
• courtroom access
• state building access
• police identification rules

Their argument is: “You can enforce federal law here, but if you are doing it in our state, in public, while armed and detaining people, you do not get to behave like anonymous masked secret police.”

And they would be wrong, they can't dictate how, where or by whom federal law is enforced by federal agents. They are just trying to protect criminal aliens.

.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

SCOTUS has already reaffirmed that immigration laws are federally enforced, so states don't get to dictate the policies.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

We don't need or want a secret police in the USA.

We don't need or want leftist assholes in the USA.

 

[Moonglow]

We don't need or want leftist assholes in the USA.

Tough shit, you'll get 'em.

 

[Moonglow]

SCOTUS has already reaffirmed that immigration laws are federally enforced, so states don't get to dictate the policies.

States do not make immigration policy or laws that falls under the jurisdiction of the federal government.

 

[Moonglow]

And they would be wrong, they can't dictate how, where or by whom federal law is enforced by federal agents. They are just trying to protect criminal aliens.

.

Federal agents generally operate under federal authority, with the Supremacy Clause allowing them to enforce federal laws nationwide, often independent of local or state permission. While states cannot dictate federal operations, federal agents are not absolutely immune from state law and can be prosecuted if they act outside their lawful duties. [1, 2, 3, 4]

 

[citygator]

And they would be wrong, they can't dictate how, where or by whom federal law is enforced by federal agents. They are just trying to protect criminal aliens.

.

You are wrong. They can and ALREADY do dictate operational procedures.

An ICE agent in Connecticut does not get to say:

• “I’m federal, so I can ignore Connecticut speed limits.”
• “I’m federal, so I can park in a fire lane.”
• “I’m federal, so I can blow through red lights.”
• “I’m federal, so I don’t need a valid driver’s license.”

You simply typing the opposite doesnt make it true.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Connecticut is not claiming it can abolish ICE or stop federal immigration enforcement outright. That would lose immediately under the Supremacy Clause.

Instead, Connecticut is arguing it can regulate the manner in which law enforcement: including federal officers physically operating in Connecticut that engages the public, just like states regulate:

• use of force
• trespass
• assault
• impersonation
• licensing
• public safety conduct
• courtroom access
• state building access
• police identification rules

Their argument is: “You can enforce federal law here, but if you are doing it in our state, in public, while armed and detaining people, you do not get to behave like anonymous masked secret police.”

Reality check.
They are doing it because they are Dimocrats, and they work endlessly to hinder any deportations, and that's all they are doing here.
They'll claim otherwise with their clichés about 'secret police' but it's nothing more than making it harder to enforce our immigration laws.

 

[citygator]

Reality check.
They are doing it because they are Dimocrats, and they work endlessly to hinder any deportations, and that's all they are doing here.
They'll claim otherwise with their clichés about 'secret police' but it's nothing more than making it harder to enforce our immigration laws.

Laws are laws.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Federal agents generally operate under federal authority, with the Supremacy Clause allowing them to enforce federal laws nationwide, often independent of local or state permission. While states cannot dictate federal operations, federal agents are not absolutely immune from state law and can be prosecuted if they act outside their lawful duties. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Thanks for the copy and paste.

By the way, I noticed you disappeared after the election, and didn't show back up for a year.

 

[Moonglow]

Thanks for the copy and paste.

By the way, I noticed you disappeared after the election, and didn't show back up for a year.

A pink slip vacation, duh.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Laws are laws.

All created because you stupid bastards want our country flooded. You are disgusting.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

A pink slip vacation, duh.

Yeah sure. You wimped out when you got your ass handed to you, and you couldn't man up and take it.

 

[citygator]

All created because you stupid bastards want our country flooded. You are disgusting.

I have 3 degrees from some of the best universities in the world and have a brainy job... I am not stupid. The only point of contention between democrats and republicans is whether to honor the law when processing asylum claims. Both sides want a secure border with orderly processing of applicants.

To righties that means treating applicants as terrible as possible because they are all lying criminals trying to rape white women that wouldnt give you incels the time of day and vote illegally.

To liberals that means evaluating asylum claims individually for merit, treating them with dignity while that happens and orderly deporting them or allowing them to stay based on the hearing outcome. It means acknowledging that 94% of applicants show up for their hearing and that 50% of "illegals" were legally allowed into the US but overstayed their stay. It means being intelligent about it and not crazy hicks afraid of brown skin.