Newsom Says "Screw The Law!"

[red states rule]

His reply would be in that pukey green text amidst your jump of shit in quotes.

(Just trying to help)

You call that a reply?

Seems more of a self indulging moment to me

 

[Shattered]

You call that a reply?

Seems more of a self indulging moment to me

Not the least bit self-indulgent.. I got no gratification out of that post..

Oh, wait.. I did. I got a rise out of you without putting any real effort forth.

 

[Gunny]

You call that a reply?

Seems more of a self indulging moment to me

Y'think? I'm STILL waiting for you to substantiate your stance. What specific law(s) has Newsome violated?

 

[Shattered]

Y'think? I'm STILL waiting for you to substantiate your stance. What specific law(s) has Newsome violated?

I'M the self-indulgent one; not you. Sheesh.

 

[red states rule]

Y'think? I'm STILL waiting for you to substantiate your stance. What specific law(s) has Newsome violated?

Try Title 8 of the US Code that indicates is it a crime to harbor an illegal

 

[red states rule]

BTW, the law reads:

(iii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation

 

[Gunny]

Try Title 8 of the US Code that indicates is it a crime to harbor an illegal

He didn't say he was harboring illegal aliens.

 

[Gunny]

BTW, the law reads:

(iii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation

Now go through all your little links and find out who is responsible for enforcing that law. When the federal government usurps the state's authority, and does not fund the state nor direct the state to enforce its laws, the state has no responsibility in the issue.

 

[Edward]

One thing you forgot to mention - they already broke the law by being here in the first place

I did not fail to mention this as this is irrelevent in terms of the Mayor of San Francisco. These people did not break any law or ordinance of the City of San Francisco and if the federal government or the State of California has a law than the federal or state government respectively must enforce it. The Mayor of San Francisco is not the Mayor of the United States or the Mayor of California. Many of the people who vote in State and federal elections do not vote in San Francisco elections. Refusing to enforce the federal law is not a crime and the San Francisco Mayor isn't breaking the law by refusing to enforce a law passed by another government. Only in a consolidated empire would this be the case but we all know that Republicans favor a consolidated empire and that their ideological forebears fought for it in the Constitutional Convention but they lost and liberals are thankful that they lost and that our system of government is a constitutional republic.

 

[red states rule]

He didn't say he was harboring illegal aliens.

Mayor Gavin Newsom has said that San Francisco would ignore any immigration laws put in place that criminalizes illegal aliens

If that is not harboring then what is

Come on Gunny, I give you more credit then that

 

[red states rule]

Now go through all your little links and find out who is responsible for enforcing that law. When the federal government usurps the state's authority, and does not fund the state nor direct the state to enforce its laws, the state has no responsibility in the issue.

This is a Federal law he is violating

 

[red states rule]

I did not fail to mention this as this is irrelevent in terms of the Mayor of San Francisco. These people did not break any law or ordinance of the City of San Francisco and if the federal government or the State of California has a law than the federal or state government respectively must enforce it. The Mayor of San Francisco is not the Mayor of the United States or the Mayor of California. Many of the people who vote in State and federal elections do not vote in San Francisco elections. Refusing to enforce the federal law is not a crime and the San Francisco Mayor isn't breaking the law by refusing to enforce a law passed by another government. Only in a consolidated empire would this be the case but we all know that Republicans favor a consolidated empire and that their ideological forebears fought for it in the Constitutional Convention but they lost and liberals are thankful that they lost and that our system of government is a constitutional republic.

If the city wants to ignore a Federal law - cut off ALL fedral money to the city

That would bring them back to the real world

 

[Edward]

The point is, this Mayor is telling the Federal government and the law to fuck off.

That is exactly what he is telling them and that is his constitutional right and if he believes that the federal law is wrong than he has a duty to refuse to enforce it. Here he isn't violating that law but merely saying, "if you want this law enforced than you enforce it..." That isn't a crime and as soon as it becomes a crime it is time for America to have another revolution.

Illegals are costing the taxpayers of CA billions and the number is growing.

This is irrelevent to the issue at hand and this will be discussed by Congress, the State Legislature and the various muncipalities. I find it interesting that Republicans and conservatives have no problem with cities passing laws that go beyond the federal law and object when other cities pass laws which are weaker than the federal law. Republicans want city governments to enforce federal law and to act as appendages of the federal government which they are not. This is a constitutional republic and not an empire.

He did the same thing when the voters in CA, voted to state the the CA Constitution marriage is between a man and a women

The voters in California are not the same as the voters in San Francisco and the Mayor of San Francisco doesn't represent people who live in other cities and counties. The laws and ordinances of San Francisco can be stronger or weaker than state law and the government of San Francisco can intepret the State and Federal Constitution differently than the government of Providence in Rhode Island. The Mayor isn't violating the law by refusing to enforce the federal law and the federal government is still free to enforce its own laws but the duty of Mayor Newsom is to enforce San Francisco law and ordinance.

 

[Edward]

If the city wants to ignore a Federal law - cut off ALL fedral money to the city

That would bring them back to the real world

If the federal government wants to cut off federal money to the city than the city should cut off ALL city money to the federal government. If enough cities, counties and states do that than that will bring them back to the real world.

 

[red states rule]

That is exactly what he is telling them and that is his constitutional right and if he believes that the federal law is wrong than he has a duty to refuse to enforce it. Here he isn't violating that law but merely saying, "if you want this law enforced than you enforce it..." That isn't a crime and as soon as it becomes a crime it is time for America to have another revolution.



This is irrelevent to the issue at hand and this will be discussed by Congress, the State Legislature and the various muncipalities. I find it interesting that Republicans and conservatives have no problem with cities passing laws that go beyond the federal law and object when other cities pass laws which are weaker than the federal law. Republicans want city governments to enforce federal law and to act as appendages of the federal government which they are not. This is a constitutional republic and not an empire.



The voters in California are not the same as the voters in San Francisco and the Mayor of San Francisco doesn't represent people who live in other cities and counties. The laws and ordinances of San Francisco can be stronger or weaker than state law and the government of San Francisco can intepret the State and Federal Constitution differently than the government of Providence in Rhode Island. The Mayor isn't violating the law by refusing to enforce the federal law and the federal government is still free to enforce its own laws but the duty of Mayor Newsom is to enforce San Francisco law and ordinance.

What planet do you live on?

We cannot pick and choose what laws we obey - we obey all of them

The illegals are here ILLEGALLY

Perhaps if Newsom is sent to jail for 10 years (which is the term for violation of Title Eight) others will not be so willing to break the law.

 

[Edward]

The legal consequence for this Mayor speaking out is ....what exactly?

The Mayor speaking out and refusing to enforce a federal law has no legal consequence and the federal government is still able to enforce its own laws just like every state and city is. The federal governments routinely refuse to enforce municipal laws and Governors and the President routinely make statements to the effect that they will not enforce a Municipal ordinance or law. This is no different, and if the Mayor of San Francisco does not want to utilize city funds and resources to enforce a non-municipal law that is his right and that is the right of the taxpayers of San Francisco.

 

[red states rule]

The Mayor speaking out and refusing to enforce a federal law has no legal consequence and the federal government is still able to enforce its own laws just like every state and city is. The federal governments routinely refuse to enforce municipal laws and Governors and the President routinely make statements to the effect that they will not enforce a Municipal ordinance or law. This is no different, and if the Mayor of San Francisco does not want to utilize city funds and resources to enforce a non-municipal law that is his right and that is the right of the taxpayers of San Francisco.

Libs like to ignore laws they disagree with

Here is the law Newsome is violating

a) Criminal penalties
(1)
(A) Any person who—
(i) knowing that a person is an alien, brings to or attempts to bring to the United States in any manner whatsoever such person at a place other than a designated port of entry or place other than as designated by the Commissioner, regardless of whether such alien has received prior official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States and regardless of any future official action which may be taken with respect to such alien;
(ii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, transports, or moves or attempts to transport or move such alien within the United States by means of transportation or otherwise, in furtherance of such violation of law;
(iii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation;
(iv) encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law; or
(v)
(I) engages in any conspiracy to commit any of the preceding acts, or
(II) aids or abets the commission of any of the preceding acts,
shall be punished as provided in subparagraph (B).
(B) A person who violates subparagraph (A) shall, for each alien in respect to whom such a violation occurs—
(i) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i) or (v)(I) or in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(ii), (iii), or (iv) in which the offense was done for the purpose of commercial advantage or private financial gain, be fined under title 18, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both;

 

[Edward]

What planet do you live on?

The question is what planet do you live on?

We cannot pick and choose what laws we obey - we obey all of them

The Mayor isn't picking and choosing what laws to obey, instead he is simply refusing to enforce a federal law and use city resources to do so. He is not an agent of the federal government, and his job is to enforce CITY LAW while the job of the Executive Branch of the federal government is to enforce federal law. Mayor Newsom is simply stating that he will not enforce a non-city law and use city resources to do it.

The illegals are here ILLEGALLY

They are here in violation of federal law so let the federal government enforce its laws but they are not in San Francisco in violation of San Francisco law or ordinance so the Mayor has chosen not to enforce the federal law in this matter instead leaving that to the federal government.

Perhaps if Newsom is sent to jail for 10 years (which is the term for violation of Title Eight) others will not be so willing to break the law.

If that happens than America is no longer free and the people of San Francisco and the supporters of Mayor Newsom would have the right to declare war on those who would oppress. How dare you tell the taxpayers of San Francisco that they have to use city resources to enforce non-municipal laws and that if the government of San Francisco refuses to do so that the officers of that Government will be put in jail for 10 years. If you can't get this than you are a fucking moron and I will gladly declare war on you if your fucking representatives kidnap the representative of the people of San Francisco and than we will see just how fucking happy your silly ass is as you cry about how your elected members of Parliment voted. Let's not forget that Britain elected its leaders jackass and those elected leaders still violated the rights of the people and there had to be a revolution.

 

[red states rule]

Try reading the contents of the law, then try to say with a straight face Newsome is not breaking the law

 

[Edward]

As I already stated, he doesn't have to enforce anything. He doesn't work for INS, nor does he have jurisdiction over NIS.

Red States is a moron and cannot grasp this simple fact. The Mayor of a City is not an agent of the federal government and it isn't in his job responsibilities to do so. He instead is tasked with enforcing city law and ordinance and for ensuring that those laws and ordinances are implemented. I for one do not want my municipal taxes used to enforce a federal law so as to subsidize those who passed those law by giving them a free ride. Southern states and cities would be forced to bear the greatest amount and would have to pay the most while northern cities get a free ride. This is a fundamental violation of the rights of the taxpayers of San Francisco who would now be paying for the enforcement of a federal law while those who are from northern cities and smaller towns would not have to do so. This is asinine and only fucking morons would suggest that it is the duty of cities to enforce federal law.