ICE wants to slap SMUGGLING CHARGES on leaders of sanctuary cities.

[busybee01]

States are sovereign. The federal government has no police power outside of the federal districts.

Sanctuary CITIES are NOT sovereign.

Just clueless and Causeless?

States are sovereign. The federal government has no police power outside of the federal districts.

We are not discussing sanctuary states. Sanctuary cities are not states. Sanctuary cities are not sovereign. The feds may not have police powers but they have control of the flow of federal money. Sucks, but this is where we are.

The Executive branch does not have the power to place restrictions on federal money unless the Congress passes it.

 

[Tresha91203]

States are sovereign. The federal government has no police power outside of the federal districts.

Sanctuary CITIES are NOT sovereign.

Just clueless and Causeless?

States are sovereign. The federal government has no police power outside of the federal districts.

We are not discussing sanctuary states. Sanctuary cities are not states. Sanctuary cities are not sovereign. The feds may not have police powers but they have control of the flow of federal money. Sucks, but this is where we are.

The Executive branch does not have the power to place restrictions on federal money unless the Congress passes it.

He can withhold grants. Grants are a small portion of the Federal budget, but it happens to be a way the Fed's fund LE and education programs, etc.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

States are sovereign. The federal government has no police power outside of the federal districts.

Wrong the Federal Government has limited police power to ensure all the powers delegated to it are enforced. That includes every State every city and every where.

The federal government has no police power outside of the federal districts.

Repeating the same ignorant statement does not make it true.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Various red states passed over 200 laws during president Obama's time in office that instructed city and state officials to ignore federal laws regarding guns.

Conservatives hate something until they love it. STATE'S RIGHTS, then the next day NO STATE'S RIGHTS. Like children love fidget spinners today and then tomorrow all ten million fidget spinners are collecting dust in the closet. Ever hear of pogs?

Cons this is why you are ignored. Whenever something shiny comes into your view you completely change your beliefs. Like a cat that doesn't want to be dunked in the bath water you cling to whatever your emotions tell you to cling to today. Tomorrow it will be something else. Just go to your safe space.

 

[busybee01]

States are sovereign. The federal government has no police power outside of the federal districts.

Sanctuary CITIES are NOT sovereign.

Just clueless and Causeless?

States are sovereign. The federal government has no police power outside of the federal districts.

We are not discussing sanctuary states. Sanctuary cities are not states. Sanctuary cities are not sovereign. The feds may not have police powers but they have control of the flow of federal money. Sucks, but this is where we are.

The Executive branch does not have the power to place restrictions on federal money unless the Congress passes it.

He can withhold grants. Grants are a small portion of the Federal budget, but it happens to be a way the Fed's fund LE and education programs, etc.

He cannot withhold grants unless the Congress grants the power to do so. The federal government can impound appropriated funds only if it is authorized by Congress.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Various red states passed over 200 laws during president Obama's time in office that instructed city and state officials to ignore federal laws regarding guns.

Conservatives hate something until they love it. STATE'S RIGHTS, then the next day NO STATE'S RIGHTS. Like children love fidget spinners today and then tomorrow all ten million fidget spinners are collecting dust in the closet. Ever hear of pogs?

Cons this is why you are ignored. Whenever something shiny comes into your view you completely change your beliefs. Like a cat that doesn't want to be dunked in the bath water you cling to whatever your emotions tell you to cling to today. Tomorrow it will be something else. Just go to your safe space.

RETARD alert you liberals make shit up daily and then support it like lemmings running off a cliff.

 

[danielpalos]

Let's say you are arrested in Georgia, and you are wanted in Montana for a crime. The computer spits out the warrant when a cop checks your license. You are arrested because there is a warrant for your arrest.

The warrant is signed by a judge. Now, the cops in Georgia aren't going to hold you indefinitely. They'll notify Montana that you are arrested. Montana has to do some things to get you transported to them.

Now, all of this started when a Judge signed a warrant. For an ICE detainer, it's not signed by a judge, or filed with a court.

Now, let's play that out with ICE. You get picked up for Disturbing the peace. Everyone else who is arrested for that is processed in, and bail is low, so you're out again with a small amount of money paid and a court date assigned. But ICE sends over a request to hold you.

So you are held, twenty four hours later, you're still held, seventy two hours, and you are still held. You call an attorney and ask for help. The attorney is hired, and goes to the court demanding to know why you are being held still. The Sheriff's department says you are being held because they have a detainer request from an ICE agent.

Three more days go by, and nothing. Now, you have been held longer than the average jail sentence for the crime you were picked up for, you have no additional charges filed, the sheriff is on the hook for the wrongful detention lawsuit. The Sheriff has no legal reason to hold you, all he has is the detainer request.

A request is asking for a favor. To borrow a cup of sugar from the neighbor, or ask the neighbor for help. A request can be granted, or denied. You can tell your neighbor that your lawnmower is acting up and needs to be repaired. You can tell him you are all out of sugar and need to go to the store yourself.

That is the first difference, there is no order from a judge, so the sheriff is holding the individual named in the detainer request indefinitely. That is actually risky for the sheriff, after a little while, he is liable for the damages in the lawsuit. The claim that he was doing a favor is not a defense against wrongdoing.

The 48 hour window that everyone talks about, that is how long you can hold someone without charging them with a crime. That means walking them before a judge and a prosecutor actually telling the judge the crimes they are accused of.

After that, it's a civil rights violation to hold them.

We hold prisoners for 30 days for interstate extraditions and longer for international ones, even with no US charges filed.

Jail Time Awaiting Extradition on Old Out-of-State Felony Warrant

Those same sheriff's will do for foreign governments what they refuse to do for the US govt, all while taking federal US dollars.

An illegal alien COULD be charged with the crime of being illegal, thus being able to be held longer. Sanctuaries don't want that, though, so they actively minimize charges. They are looking for ways to NOT comply.

Not in any State, after 1808.

Is it your claim that there have been no interstate extraditions since 1808?

Extradition means a legal process has been completed. There is no extradition for illegals.

Yes, I understand that. Extradition, however, is an example of US citizens being held for 30 days legally until another entity (including the Feds) can come get them ... you know, what Sanctuary Cities say they CAN'T do for illegals. It was in reference to your statement,

"The 48 hour window that everyone talks about, that is how long you can hold someone without charging them with a crime. That means walking them before a judge and a prosecutor actually telling the judge the crimes they are accused of."

I was pointing out that we CAN hold people legally for more than 30 days, and often do. I also stated that we could easily charge them, extending the 48 hours, but that Sanctuary Cities do not want to do that. They actively MINIMIZE charges for illegals. US citizens usually get charges maximized so prosecutors have something to work down during the plea. In sanctuary cities, illegals do not generally get maximized charges so they can get released quickly (before ICE can get there). It is not a matter of not wanting to do the feds jobs for them. They literally want to be a sanctuary for illegals. They don't hide it ... it is even in their name.

Charge them with what?

 

[danielpalos]

States are sovereign. The federal government has no police power outside of the federal districts.

Sanctuary CITIES are NOT sovereign.

Just clueless and Causeless?

States are sovereign. The federal government has no police power outside of the federal districts.

We are not discussing sanctuary states. Sanctuary cities are not states. Sanctuary cities are not sovereign. The feds may not have police powers but they have control of the flow of federal money. Sucks, but this is where we are.

Cities are mere, Organs of States.

 

[danielpalos]

States are sovereign. The federal government has no police power outside of the federal districts.

Wrong the Federal Government has limited police power to ensure all the powers delegated to it are enforced. That includes every State every city and every where.

The federal government has no police power outside of the federal districts.

Repeating the same ignorant statement does not make it true.

Just because you are clueless and Causeless, doesn't make it false.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

States are sovereign. The federal government has no police power outside of the federal districts.

Wrong the Federal Government has limited police power to ensure all the powers delegated to it are enforced. That includes every State every city and every where.

The federal government has no police power outside of the federal districts.

Repeating the same ignorant statement does not make it true.

Just because you are clueless and Causeless, doesn't make it false.

Read the Constitution dumb ass, it provides that the US Federal Government through Congress has the power to ensure any action to see that the powers granted Congress are enforced and maintained.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

HAHAHA. Hey stupid. Are you saying states that give drivers licenses to illegals are NOT encouraging them to live in america?? How about letting illegals collect welfare? How about Aunt Barry giving millions of illegals a certificate saying they can live and work here??? THINK, white-hating racist.

States can say that they don't ask for proof of citizenship. Then the government would have to prove that they did it to allow illegals to come here. By your interpretation, someone who advocates for sanctuary cities could be arrested. THINK racist pig.

We're not talking about mere advocacy for illegals. We're talking about actually doing things for them like giving them drivers licenses. That clearly qualifies as encouragement and is a federal felony THINK

 

[Tresha91203]

Sanctuary CITIES are NOT sovereign.

Just clueless and Causeless?

States are sovereign. The federal government has no police power outside of the federal districts.

We are not discussing sanctuary states. Sanctuary cities are not states. Sanctuary cities are not sovereign. The feds may not have police powers but they have control of the flow of federal money. Sucks, but this is where we are.

The Executive branch does not have the power to place restrictions on federal money unless the Congress passes it.

He can withhold grants. Grants are a small portion of the Federal budget, but it happens to be a way the Fed's fund LE and education programs, etc.

He cannot withhold grants unless the Congress grants the power to do so. The federal government can impound appropriated funds only if it is authorized by Congress.

Well, sort of. He can withhold a portion without congress. It is true he would need congress to withhold 100%. I think congress would get on board. He's good at drawing attention to single issues enough to rally the base and sic them on their representatives.

Can Trump cut off funds for sanctuary cities? The Constitution says yes.

 

[Tresha91203]

We hold prisoners for 30 days for interstate extraditions and longer for international ones, even with no US charges filed.

Jail Time Awaiting Extradition on Old Out-of-State Felony Warrant

Those same sheriff's will do for foreign governments what they refuse to do for the US govt, all while taking federal US dollars.

An illegal alien COULD be charged with the crime of being illegal, thus being able to be held longer. Sanctuaries don't want that, though, so they actively minimize charges. They are looking for ways to NOT comply.

Not in any State, after 1808.

Is it your claim that there have been no interstate extraditions since 1808?

Extradition means a legal process has been completed. There is no extradition for illegals.

Yes, I understand that. Extradition, however, is an example of US citizens being held for 30 days legally until another entity (including the Feds) can come get them ... you know, what Sanctuary Cities say they CAN'T do for illegals. It was in reference to your statement,

"The 48 hour window that everyone talks about, that is how long you can hold someone without charging them with a crime. That means walking them before a judge and a prosecutor actually telling the judge the crimes they are accused of."

I was pointing out that we CAN hold people legally for more than 30 days, and often do. I also stated that we could easily charge them, extending the 48 hours, but that Sanctuary Cities do not want to do that. They actively MINIMIZE charges for illegals. US citizens usually get charges maximized so prosecutors have something to work down during the plea. In sanctuary cities, illegals do not generally get maximized charges so they can get released quickly (before ICE can get there). It is not a matter of not wanting to do the feds jobs for them. They literally want to be a sanctuary for illegals. They don't hide it ... it is even in their name.

Charge them with what?

The crime they were picked up on! Sheriffs aren't out rounding up illegals. We are talking about someone who has been picked up and is already in custody AND THEN it is discovered that he is here illegally.

Quit processing them out in 12 hours after ICE calls and let's you (Tucson or whatever Sanctuary City) know they are coming for him just because you want to be a douche. Quit acting like it's illegal to hold such a person longer when we routinely hold US citizens longer with no problem. Quit acting like it's illegal to deny bail to such a person when we routinely deny US citizens bail if they are determined to be a flight risk.

Sanctuary Cities endanger the rest of the country. You have no way to keep illegals in your sanctuaries. You are a magnet to illegal aliens and refuse to get rid of the criminals so they spill out into the rest of the US. If you keep offering sanctuary to illegals with multiple deportations plus felonies in the US, you are going to be the wild west. What the hell is the point of twisting so hard to pretend we just CAN'T have ICE deporting criminal illegal aliens. Why lie to protect criminal illegal aliens?

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Why lie to protect criminal illegal aliens?

Because all politicians collect corporate bribes for supporting illegals.

Dems also get more votes.