Texas to arrest Sanctuary City Leaders, Police Chiefs, etc...

[danielpalos]

Should ICE agents be allowed to write speeding tickets ? No, cause that's not their job .

Just poor reasoning
If they saw an assault taking place your idea would be they stand back because "not immigration"

First degrees should go first; is first, reasoning.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

No, they can't. But what's happening in Texas is something they can do. If the state creates a law or requirement of working with the feds, you work with the feds. If you don't, your municipality may be subject to losing state funds. If they want to lose those funds, fine, do what you like. But don't complain about the results.

10USC311 is also, federal law; you cannot, "pick and choose".

You mean the militia law, you are aware that does not in anyway restrict who can and can not own possess or use weapons right? And that the Supreme Court ruled that the 2nd is in an INDIVIDUAL right not a collective right?

There is no individual right, regarding the militia.

It is not now nor ever a requirement to be IN a militia to own possess or use firearms. And the Supreme Court so ruled.

I am not claiming there is. You merely confuse, natural rights, with our Second Article of Amendment to our federal Constitution.

There are No natural rights secured by our Second Amendment.

Natural rights are recognized and secured in State Constitutions and available via Due Process.

The militia has nothing to do with 2nd amendment rights except that to HAVE a militia the population must own possess and use firearms.

 

[Dr Grump]

More lies by the Government, a Government agency that stone walled the Congress and purposefully hid evidence from them.

Great. Now you're a conspiracy theorist.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

More lies by the Government, a Government agency that stone walled the Congress and purposefully hid evidence from them.

Great. Now you're a conspiracy theorist.

I watched it happen as it happened. I know what was claimed and never proven, for example the Government claims the compound had fully automatic weapons yet never actually provided any to support the claim afterwards claiming they all burned up in the fire. The BATF claimed the Davidians were illegally purchasing firearms but what they don't tell you is that there were several FFL holders in the compound and to make the ignorant claim they were doing it illegally BATF canceled the the FFL of those people just before the raid and never told them. Every firearm at the compound was LEGALLY purchased. They claimed they were making grenades yet NOT a single grenade was provided after the raid to support the claim. It is perfectly legal to buy grenade bodies and to own black powder which the Davidians did. They made NO GRENADES out of them though. Not until late in the siege was any claim made about child molestation that was a red herring Janet Reno came up with to excuse the botched BATF raid and it was never verified or proven.

By the way, automatic weapons don't burn up in house fires.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Further on the day of the raid they were filming, On that day and only on that day was clip shown of the BATF members on the roof, 3 of them enter a window and the 4th guy opens fire on the same window with automatic weapons fire. They deep sixed that video but I SAW IT on the day it happened. Of the vehicles in the parking lot not a SINGLE bullet hole was in a vehicle from the compound side just from the BATF side. Before Koresch even answered the door the BATF opened fire on the building the main door proves it not a single hole from inside the building just from outside.

 

[bripat9643]

It is fun reading simplistic solutions to complex problems. Until Trump ran for president, which seemed to attract simplistic people like catnip attracts cats, I had no idea just how many people buy into this kind of problem solving! I first noticed it when Trump said that he was going to deport 12 million illegal aliens within 2 years, which is impossible without violating the Constitution. Of course, now he isn't even talking about how many he will deport in any time frame. Nobody has even come out with a clear definition of what a sanctuary city is, but by god, they have to be punished! Texas is always up there with simplistic solutions. The law that they are trying to pass is so blatantly unconstitutional that it boggles the mind with questions, like, "Do they even have a law school in that state?"

Given the idea that you know more than Texas's top attorneys, tell us what's unconstitutional about it.

What Trump didn't understand was all the red tape involved with deporting people. Each deportation case has to be heard in court, and Trump didn't realize it. That's why they are adding 75 more immigrant judges to the mix.

I've been telling people on this board for over 2 years that you can not deport anyone without a trial. That is 8th grade Civics. And Trump didn't know it. What a surprise!

Sorry turd, but a hearing is all that's required to deport someone. The federal government has been doing it for 100 years.

 

[Correll]

That fact that the linked article finds it necessary to lie about the issue by calling the illegal aliens, "undocumented migrants" shows that the entire paradigm is based on dishonesty.

Since being here without permission isn't actually a felony, 'undocumented immigrants" is actually the correct term.

It's illegal to commit any crime, even if it's not a felony. Illegal entry makes them illegal aliens. If you sneak into someone's home you're not a guest, undocumented or otherwise. You are a criminal. You guys make 'undocumented' sound like nothing more than an insignificant piece of paper. No documents mean no permission, which means against federal law. It should be treated seriously.

If congress would clarify the birthright citizenship clause to deny citizenship for anchor babies, the problem would go away on it's own eventually.

Clementine, don't give up your day job to practice law. NOBODY is an illegal alien until convicted of being one in a court of law. Until then, they are an undocumented alien.

Another lefty who believes that reality is a function of perception.

Correll, the terms, "illegal alien", and "undocumented alien" are legal terms. i would not expect you to understand.

I understand that you lefties think that semantics define reality.


In reality if a person enters this country in violation of the law, they are a illegal alien. That they might not have been caught yet, does not change that.


If I illegally enter someone else's property, I am a trespasser, regardless of whether or not I have been caught.

 

[JoeB131]

Sanctuary cities go against federal law, which states are obligated to follow.

Congress needs to get more involved. If those in office wish to remain there, they had better get their shit together and address this mess.

I think you are a little confused. the people who run your movement don't want to get rid of illegals... they just want to keep you mad about it.

Same reason why abortion is still legal after 43 years. It's just something to keep your dumb, inbred ass mad about.

As long as the Rich want cheap labor, we are going to have cheap labor.

deal with it.

 

[JoeB131]

I understand that you lefties think that semantics define reality.


In reality if a person enters this country in violation of the law, they are a illegal alien. That they might not have been caught yet, does not change that.


If I illegally enter someone else's property, I am a trespasser, regardless of whether or not I have been caught.

And if you drive at 56MPH in a 55 zone, you are speeding... but most sensible people wouldn't pull you over.

 

[JoeB131]

There is no middle ground. You are either here legally, and if not, you are here illegally.

No, not really. A lot of illegals came here legally and their documentation expired. they didn't come here with the intent of breaking the law.

And if I said that about your precious blacks in the inner-city, you would have a heart attack.

You say shit like that all the time. But here's the thing, if a black person in the inner city would not have been given 43 days to surrender on their own.

They shot Tamir 1.3 seconds after getting out of the car. They didn't negotiate with him, they didn't reason with him, they didn't give him a chance to surrender.

Koresh was afforded every opportunity to surrender peacefully, and he chose mass suicide.

 

[JoeB131]

Exactly..
It was Janet and her thugs being bully's


On US soil

Um, guys. The Davidians shot and killed four ATF Agents. Now, I point this out because usually when a bully with a badge shoots a black kid in the inner city, it's because he was reaching for something, or looked menancing or some other bullshit,a nd unless you have videotape of the cops shooting the kid in the back, they aren't charge.

Koresh and his cultists shot four ATF agents serving a legal warrant. They spend 43 days trying to peacefully talk him out (because he was white) before he decided to commit mass suicide rather than go to prison and get a taste of what they do to Child molesters in prison.

Again, no great loss.

 

[martybegan]

Yeah, good luck with that.

It depends on how "home rule" of local municipalities is handled in the Texas Constitution. One is a citizen of one's State, (and of the United States), one is not a citizen of ones town, county or other local designation.

If certain powers are reserved to the State governments, or not expressly given to localities via home rule laws, then Texas may have a pretty strong case to gun for the locals if they don't play nice.

States have no authority over immigration since 1808. Our Drug War is worse; yet, the right wing doesn't complain about that as much.

The States can set how its municipalities set their laws, based on the home rule provisions of the State's constitutions.

The State can dictate how local authorities deal with the feds under those rules.

 

[JoeB131]

And not ONCE EVER did they use said weapons on anyone inside or outside the compound. The evidence shows that the BATF killed their own people and that they fired on the compound while no one in the compound fired on them. In a 90 day siege NOT one attempt was made to leave and NOT one shot was fired on any of the officials surrounding the compound. There was no reason to assault the compound. NONE NADA ZIP.

Now you are going into Crazy-town.

You had four investigations into Waco, and they all found the Davidians were at fault, one of them led by John Danforth, a Republican Senator.

 

[Valerie]

I understand that you lefties think that semantics define reality.

the semantics of our constitution matter.

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”

Federalism, the Constitution, and sanctuary cities

President-elect Donald Trump is likely to need the cooperation of state and local governments, as federal law enforcement personnel are extremely limited. Numerous cities have “sanctuary” policies under which they are committed to refusing cooperation with most federal deportation efforts. They include New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Seattle, and other cities with large immigrant populations. Sanctuary cities refuse to facilitate deportation both because city leaders believe it to be harmful and unjust, and because local law enforcement officials have concluded that it poisons community relations and undermines efforts to combat violent crime. They also recognize that mass deportation would have severe economic costs.

Under the Constitution, state and local governments have every right to refuse to help enforce federal law.

In cases like Printz v. United States (1997) and New York v. United States (1992), the Supreme Court has ruled that the Tenth Amendment forbids federal “commandeering” of state governments to help enforce federal law. Most of the support for this anti-commandeering principle came from conservative justices such as the late Antonin Scalia, who wrote the majority opinion in Printz.

Trump has said that he intends to break the resistance of sanctuary cities by cutting off all of their federal funding. The cities might continue resisting even if they do lose some federal funds. But Trump’s threat is not as formidable as it might seem.


Federalism, the Constitution, and sanctuary cities


The looming fight over sanctuary cities is an example of how federalism and constitutional limitations on federal power can sometimes protect vulnerable minorities – in this case undocumented immigrants. States and localities have a reputation for being enemies of minority rights, while the federal government is seen as their protector. That has often been true historically. But sometimes the situation is reversed – a pattern that has become more common in recent years.

Many deportation advocates claim it is essential to enforce the law against all violators. But the vast majority of Americans have violated the law at some point in their lives, and few truly believe that all lawbreaking should be punished, regardless of the nature of the law in question or the reason for the violation. And few have more defensible reasons for violating law than undocumented migrants whose only other option is a lifetime of Third World poverty and oppression. In any event, even if there is an obligation to enforce a particular law, it does not follow that the duty falls on state and local governments.

 

[Valerie]

the true irony of the "snowflake" meme is that righties are huge cowards.

 

[Valerie]

Fascists, Cowards, and Morons: Combating Anti-Muslim Bigotry

 

[toomuchtime_]

The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 addressed the relationship between the federal government and local governments. Minor crimes, such as shoplifting, became grounds for possible deportation.[26]Additionally, the legislation outlawed cities' bans against municipal workers reporting a person's immigration status to federal authorities.[27]

Sanctuary city - Wikipedia

It is a violation of federal law, dumbass.

What, specifically, does a Sanctuary city do that is in violation of federal law, and if that were true, why hasn't anyone in any of the 200 plus sanctuary cities been charged, indicted, arrested, convicted, and incarcerated for breaking federal laws?

How ******* stupid can you be? It is a civil offense, not a criminal offense, you moron.

So, what you are saying is the the city fathers of sanctuary cities have broken a federal law for which they can not be criminally prosecuted, and for which they have never been civilly litigated.....(This is getting better and better!)

If you had been paying attention you would understand the individuals are not being held liable but the municipalities are.

Well, then. I am sure that you can provide links where municipalities have found to be in violation of federal law, and have been fined, just like the feds did with Sheriff Joe's illegal racial profiling, and fined Phoenix millions of dollars, right?

They are losing federal funding, remember?

 

[danielpalos]

10USC311 is also, federal law; you cannot, "pick and choose".

You mean the militia law, you are aware that does not in anyway restrict who can and can not own possess or use weapons right? And that the Supreme Court ruled that the 2nd is in an INDIVIDUAL right not a collective right?

There is no individual right, regarding the militia.

It is not now nor ever a requirement to be IN a militia to own possess or use firearms. And the Supreme Court so ruled.

I am not claiming there is. You merely confuse, natural rights, with our Second Article of Amendment to our federal Constitution.

There are No natural rights secured by our Second Amendment.

Natural rights are recognized and secured in State Constitutions and available via Due Process.

The militia has nothing to do with 2nd amendment rights except that to HAVE a militia the population must own possess and use firearms.

good thing you are retired.

the Second Amendment has every Thing to do, with the militia.

 

[danielpalos]

Since being here without permission isn't actually a felony, 'undocumented immigrants" is actually the correct term.

It's illegal to commit any crime, even if it's not a felony. Illegal entry makes them illegal aliens. If you sneak into someone's home you're not a guest, undocumented or otherwise. You are a criminal. You guys make 'undocumented' sound like nothing more than an insignificant piece of paper. No documents mean no permission, which means against federal law. It should be treated seriously.

If congress would clarify the birthright citizenship clause to deny citizenship for anchor babies, the problem would go away on it's own eventually.

Clementine, don't give up your day job to practice law. NOBODY is an illegal alien until convicted of being one in a court of law. Until then, they are an undocumented alien.

Another lefty who believes that reality is a function of perception.

Correll, the terms, "illegal alien", and "undocumented alien" are legal terms. i would not expect you to understand.

I understand that you lefties think that semantics define reality.


In reality if a person enters this country in violation of the law, they are a illegal alien. That they might not have been caught yet, does not change that.


If I illegally enter someone else's property, I am a trespasser, regardless of whether or not I have been caught.

10USC311 is also, federal law.

The legal concept of employment at will, is a federal Doctrine in American law.

The right wing likes to, pick and choose" which policies they will support.

They prefer to "hate on the poor", given any other alternative.

 

[Timmy]

Should ICE agents be allowed to write speeding tickets ? No, cause that's not their job .

Just poor reasoning
If they saw an assault taking place your idea would be they stand back because "not immigration"

Anyone can respond to an assault .