Judge dismisses first Sanctuary City Lawsuit.Be

[SavannahMann]

First the link. I've got to type that it's a link because if this thread goes to page two, there will be someone who demands to know where I got the information.

DoJ scores a court win over sanctuary city grant policies - Hot Air

Next the commentary. That's where I put my opinion in.

From what I understand, Richmond California was the first to file the lawsuit seeking to have the courts issue an injunction that the Federal Government can not withhold Grants. The court dismissed the case without any real consideration on the Consttutionality, but because the funds have not been withheld yet, Richmond can't show any harm, or damages. So they don't have standing in the suit.

Before you get too far into the celebration or gnashing of teeth depending on your view of the subject, remember Standing was the deciding factor in the Prop 8 Supreme Court decision. The Plantiff's did not have Standing by law to speak for California. They may have had the best argument in the world. It might have been 100% true and accurate, and even right in line with the Constitution. But they did not have the right to sue, it was up to the Attorney General of California to do it, or delegate it, and he would do neither.

So the question of if the Trump Admin can withhold grant money has not been decided yet. Personally, I believe they can. A grant is a gift. You can't demand a gift, unless your title is Godfather, and your last name is Corleone. You certainly can't claim that the Constitution requires you to get this gift. But I don't predict what the Court will do, they've found weaker arguments to be exactly what the Founders intended.

 

[waltky]

Is how illegal aliens become repeat offenders...

Judicial Watch: Sanctuary Cities Denied 284 ICE Detainers for Criminal Illegals in 3 Months
October 19, 2017 | After filing a lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the government watchdog group Judicial Watch was able to obtain documents showing that sanctuary cities (and counties) all across the nation refused to help with 248 ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) detainers on criminal illegal aliens in the first three months of 2017.

"These new documents confirm that sanctuary policies are dangerous and help the worst of the worst criminal element," said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton in a statement. "The complaints of sanctuary politicians aside," said Fitton, "the Trump administration must catalogue the continued threat to the public safety caused by lawless sanctuary policies." Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit in May because the DHS did not respond to a Freedom of Information Act request by the group in April. A court order forced the release of the documents this month.

The papers include the crimes committed by illegal aliens in the first three months of 2017, a list of jails that failed to cooperate with the ICE detainer program, and the "top 50 jurisdictions that failed to cooperate with the ICE detainer program," reported Judicial Watch. Some of the top counties denying detainers included Ventura County, Calif. (188); Miami-Dade, Fla. (93); Denver, Colo. (74); Clark, Nev. (68); and Los Angeles, Calif. (57). "Nationwide, a total of 284 detainers involving serious offenses were declined during the first three months of fiscal year 2017," said Judicial Watch, "including, in part, various forms of assault (16); drug-and-alcohol-related charges (39); and weapons charges and crimes against persons and property (18)."

An April 6, 2017 email from acting DHS Director Thomas Homan about complaints from Sen. Chuck Schumer's (D-N.Y.) office concerning errors in the Declined Detainer Outcome Reports (DDOR) said, "Certainly but NYC is extremely uncooperative. We will provide the information and work with OPLA and OGC staff to engage. They removed our officers from Rikers Island and will not honor detainers...." In at least one instance, local law enforcement engaged in outright obstruction of ICE's efforts to pick up illegal immigrants, reported Judicial Watch. A March 21, 2017 ICE email states, "Hennepin County Adult Detention Center released an alien out the front door of the jail as an ICE officer was waiting in their sally port to take him into custody."

According to U.S. Immigrations and Custom Enforcement, "ICE places detainers on aliens who have been arrested on local criminal charges and for whom ICE possesses probable cause to believe that they are removable from the United States, so that ICE can take custody of the alien when he or she is released from local custody. When law enforcement agencies fail to honor immigration detainers and release serious criminal offenders, it undermines ICE’s ability to protect public safety and carry out its mission."

Judicial Watch: Sanctuary Cities Denied 284 ICE Detainers for Criminal Illegals in 3 Months

 

[SavannahMann]

Is how illegal aliens become repeat offenders...

Judicial Watch: Sanctuary Cities Denied 284 ICE Detainers for Criminal Illegals in 3 Months
October 19, 2017 | After filing a lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the government watchdog group Judicial Watch was able to obtain documents showing that sanctuary cities (and counties) all across the nation refused to help with 248 ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) detainers on criminal illegal aliens in the first three months of 2017.

"These new documents confirm that sanctuary policies are dangerous and help the worst of the worst criminal element," said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton in a statement. "The complaints of sanctuary politicians aside," said Fitton, "the Trump administration must catalogue the continued threat to the public safety caused by lawless sanctuary policies." Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit in May because the DHS did not respond to a Freedom of Information Act request by the group in April. A court order forced the release of the documents this month.

The papers include the crimes committed by illegal aliens in the first three months of 2017, a list of jails that failed to cooperate with the ICE detainer program, and the "top 50 jurisdictions that failed to cooperate with the ICE detainer program," reported Judicial Watch. Some of the top counties denying detainers included Ventura County, Calif. (188); Miami-Dade, Fla. (93); Denver, Colo. (74); Clark, Nev. (68); and Los Angeles, Calif. (57). "Nationwide, a total of 284 detainers involving serious offenses were declined during the first three months of fiscal year 2017," said Judicial Watch, "including, in part, various forms of assault (16); drug-and-alcohol-related charges (39); and weapons charges and crimes against persons and property (18)."

An April 6, 2017 email from acting DHS Director Thomas Homan about complaints from Sen. Chuck Schumer's (D-N.Y.) office concerning errors in the Declined Detainer Outcome Reports (DDOR) said, "Certainly but NYC is extremely uncooperative. We will provide the information and work with OPLA and OGC staff to engage. They removed our officers from Rikers Island and will not honor detainers...." In at least one instance, local law enforcement engaged in outright obstruction of ICE's efforts to pick up illegal immigrants, reported Judicial Watch. A March 21, 2017 ICE email states, "Hennepin County Adult Detention Center released an alien out the front door of the jail as an ICE officer was waiting in their sally port to take him into custody."

According to U.S. Immigrations and Custom Enforcement, "ICE places detainers on aliens who have been arrested on local criminal charges and for whom ICE possesses probable cause to believe that they are removable from the United States, so that ICE can take custody of the alien when he or she is released from local custody. When law enforcement agencies fail to honor immigration detainers and release serious criminal offenders, it undermines ICE’s ability to protect public safety and carry out its mission."

Judicial Watch: Sanctuary Cities Denied 284 ICE Detainers for Criminal Illegals in 3 Months

The problem Walt. Well there are actually two. First the reply doesn’t have a damn thing to do with the topic.

Second. A detainer. That is a request written on a letterhead. It is not a warrant. It is not a subpoena. It has no force of law.

Before email and all that there used to be teletype machines in police departments. These machines were tied into a network. They rattled as someone typed in information. A request for similar crimes. A request for information on a suspect. A Be on the lookout for someone. Please hold this guy until we get there.

These were also requests. If you ask me for a favor and I say no I have committed no crime. There is no legal requirement that I do whatever favor you ask of me. If you provide a warrant then I am required by law to abide by it.

I know this is complicated. But tossing the detainer requests in the trash is not a crime.