WH Threatens to Veto Anti-Sanctuary City Bill

[Flopper]

Funny thing the entire state of Texas is consider a sanctuary state for illegals, and I bet not many of you knew this...

It should not be a local officer job to find out if someone is here legally, and it should be the Federal Government job which they have failed to do countless of times before Obama and will keep on failing at after the nimrod is gone.

So passing a bill like that is just to punish liberal cities like Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, Austin and so on for failing to do what the Federal Government should have been doing all this time...

Instead of passing a bill like that why don't they start cracking down on companies and individuals that hire the illegals instead?

Oh wait that would mean cracking down on the GOP base that enjoy the illegal and paying them little while complaining they are stealing American Jobs...

Enforce the laws we already have and stop passing stupid garbage that is not needed...

Use E-verify, enforce immigration laws that are on the books, and fund the INS with the proper amount of money to hire agents to track down the illegals...

Oh why bother to use commonsense when it is easier to pass a bill that will be veto and used as political fire against the left instead?

Also for those that want a list of cities and states here you go:

List of Sanctuary cities

sanctuary cities - - Yahoo Search Results

Cities are supposed to hold illegals until they can be picked up by the feds.
They refused and the feds refuse to enforce immigration laws.

That is if they know the individual is illegal...

I knew someone that for years drove around with a legal drivers license with his actual name that was given to him by the state of California and then by the state of Texas and he even had a social security card issued to him with his actual name, and the guy was a illegal alien that overstayed his visa...

Now when the police pulled him over a few times how were they suppose to know he was illegal, and no he did not do anything illegal to obtain these ID's because there was a loophole in the laws back then that allowed him to fall through the cracks and he obtained his license to drive while on visa...

So how would a officer actually know if the person is illegal if they present legal documentation?

In the end it is the failure of the U.S. Government to enforce the laws on the books and putting any more burden on the local, county and state officers is just pure nonsense...

Now I do agree if the officer knows and let the person go then that is wrong too...

If they have the proper papers I can understand not catching them.
But as in the illegal that murdered the girl in san fran they knew damn well he was an illegal.

Despite the laws in Arizona, there is no state where a person must carry identification to prove they are entitled to be in the US. In fact, a person stopped on the street is not required by law to disclose citizenship or immigration status. So local law enforcement is often on very shaky grounds when they arrest and detain a person because they suspect violation of immigration laws.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Funny thing the entire state of Texas is consider a sanctuary state for illegals, and I bet not many of you knew this...

It should not be a local officer job to find out if someone is here legally, and it should be the Federal Government job which they have failed to do countless of times before Obama and will keep on failing at after the nimrod is gone.

So passing a bill like that is just to punish liberal cities like Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, Austin and so on for failing to do what the Federal Government should have been doing all this time...

Instead of passing a bill like that why don't they start cracking down on companies and individuals that hire the illegals instead?

Oh wait that would mean cracking down on the GOP base that enjoy the illegal and paying them little while complaining they are stealing American Jobs...

Enforce the laws we already have and stop passing stupid garbage that is not needed...

Use E-verify, enforce immigration laws that are on the books, and fund the INS with the proper amount of money to hire agents to track down the illegals...

Oh why bother to use commonsense when it is easier to pass a bill that will be veto and used as political fire against the left instead?

Also for those that want a list of cities and states here you go:

List of Sanctuary cities

sanctuary cities - - Yahoo Search Results

Cities are supposed to hold illegals until they can be picked up by the feds.
They refused and the feds refuse to enforce immigration laws.

That is if they know the individual is illegal...

I knew someone that for years drove around with a legal drivers license with his actual name that was given to him by the state of California and then by the state of Texas and he even had a social security card issued to him with his actual name, and the guy was a illegal alien that overstayed his visa...

Now when the police pulled him over a few times how were they suppose to know he was illegal, and no he did not do anything illegal to obtain these ID's because there was a loophole in the laws back then that allowed him to fall through the cracks and he obtained his license to drive while on visa...

So how would a officer actually know if the person is illegal if they present legal documentation?

In the end it is the failure of the U.S. Government to enforce the laws on the books and putting any more burden on the local, county and state officers is just pure nonsense...

Now I do agree if the officer knows and let the person go then that is wrong too...

If they have the proper papers I can understand not catching them.
But as in the illegal that murdered the girl in san fran they knew damn well he was an illegal.

Despite the laws in Arizona, there is no state where a person must carry identification to prove they are entitled to be in the US. In fact, a person stopped on the street is not required by law to disclose citizenship or immigration status. So local law enforcement is often on very shaky grounds when they arrest and detain a person because they suspect violation of immigration laws.

Wait ...what?
I was talken about californication.

 

[Flopper]

Funny thing the entire state of Texas is consider a sanctuary state for illegals, and I bet not many of you knew this...

It should not be a local officer job to find out if someone is here legally, and it should be the Federal Government job which they have failed to do countless of times before Obama and will keep on failing at after the nimrod is gone.

So passing a bill like that is just to punish liberal cities like Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, Austin and so on for failing to do what the Federal Government should have been doing all this time...

Instead of passing a bill like that why don't they start cracking down on companies and individuals that hire the illegals instead?

Oh wait that would mean cracking down on the GOP base that enjoy the illegal and paying them little while complaining they are stealing American Jobs...

Enforce the laws we already have and stop passing stupid garbage that is not needed...

Use E-verify, enforce immigration laws that are on the books, and fund the INS with the proper amount of money to hire agents to track down the illegals...

Oh why bother to use commonsense when it is easier to pass a bill that will be veto and used as political fire against the left instead?

Also for those that want a list of cities and states here you go:

List of Sanctuary cities

sanctuary cities - - Yahoo Search Results

Cities are supposed to hold illegals until they can be picked up by the feds.
They refused and the feds refuse to enforce immigration laws.

That is if they know the individual is illegal...

I knew someone that for years drove around with a legal drivers license with his actual name that was given to him by the state of California and then by the state of Texas and he even had a social security card issued to him with his actual name, and the guy was a illegal alien that overstayed his visa...

Now when the police pulled him over a few times how were they suppose to know he was illegal, and no he did not do anything illegal to obtain these ID's because there was a loophole in the laws back then that allowed him to fall through the cracks and he obtained his license to drive while on visa...

So how would a officer actually know if the person is illegal if they present legal documentation?

In the end it is the failure of the U.S. Government to enforce the laws on the books and putting any more burden on the local, county and state officers is just pure nonsense...

Now I do agree if the officer knows and let the person go then that is wrong too...

If they have the proper papers I can understand not catching them.
But as in the illegal that murdered the girl in san fran they knew damn well he was an illegal.

Despite the laws in Arizona, there is no state where a person must carry identification to prove they are entitled to be in the US. In fact, a person stopped on the street is not required by law to disclose citizenship or immigration status. So local law enforcement is often on very shaky grounds when they arrest and detain a person because they suspect violation of immigration laws.

Wait ...what?
I was talken about californication.

If there is evidence that the person is in the country illegally, that's different.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"WH Threatens to Veto Anti-Sanctuary City Bill"

And appropriately so.

City and local governments have the right allocate their scarce resources as they see fit, they can't be compelled to do the tasks of Federal agencies at the expense of those scarce resources.

If ICE, for example, should request a city detain a person suspected of entering the country absent authorization, the city will gladly comply; but Federal immigration law in no way requires city and local governments to act unilaterally and seek out those suspected of being in the country illegally.

Cities that elect to not act in the capacity of immigration enforcement have done nothing wrong, have violated no laws, where subjecting them to punitive measures is partisan and unwarranted.

 

[Conservative65]

sanctuary cities have a ''don't ask, don't tell'' policy....the employees simply are not required to ask a person for their papers, they don't ask people if they are citizens or not....

this is what I read about sanctuary cities, and how it works there....they simply don't ask for citizenship proof.... or something like that?

Then why call them sanctuary cities. If no one knows, there's no reason to call them anything. A sanctuary city, by definition, is one where those running choose not to prosecute illegals. If they don't know who is and who isn't illegal, why are they referred to as something that doesn't matter?

Nope. Cities can not prosecute persons for violation of immigration law. Immigration violations must be adjudicated in federal immigration court. In fact, local law enforcement can't even arrest most people who are in the country illegally because being in the country without proper documentation is not necessarily a crime. They can only detain the person, usually a maximum of 72 hours for transfer to federal authorities. Federal immigration agents will determine whether the person has a status violation, usually overstaying a visa or entering the country illegally, a criminal misdemeanor.


If we are to fix the illegal immigration problem we have change the law.

Those cities won't detain them.

If we are to fix the problem we have to ENFORCE the laws not allow cities to disobey them.

 

[Conservative65]

"WH Threatens to Veto Anti-Sanctuary City Bill"

And appropriately so.

City and local governments have the right allocate their scarce resources as they see fit, they can't be compelled to do the tasks of Federal agencies at the expense of those scarce resources.

If ICE, for example, should request a city detain a person suspected of entering the country absent authorization, the city will gladly comply; but Federal immigration law in no way requires city and local governments to act unilaterally and seek out those suspected of being in the country illegally.

Cities that elect to not act in the capacity of immigration enforcement have done nothing wrong, have violated no laws, where subjecting them to punitive measures is partisan and unwarranted.

Does that apply to federal gun laws, too?

 

[Flopper]

sanctuary cities have a ''don't ask, don't tell'' policy....the employees simply are not required to ask a person for their papers, they don't ask people if they are citizens or not....

this is what I read about sanctuary cities, and how it works there....they simply don't ask for citizenship proof.... or something like that?

Then why call them sanctuary cities. If no one knows, there's no reason to call them anything. A sanctuary city, by definition, is one where those running choose not to prosecute illegals. If they don't know who is and who isn't illegal, why are they referred to as something that doesn't matter?

Nope. Cities can not prosecute persons for violation of immigration law. Immigration violations must be adjudicated in federal immigration court. In fact, local law enforcement can't even arrest most people who are in the country illegally because being in the country without proper documentation is not necessarily a crime. They can only detain the person, usually a maximum of 72 hours for transfer to federal authorities. Federal immigration agents will determine whether the person has a status violation, usually overstaying a visa or entering the country illegally, a criminal misdemeanor.


If we are to fix the illegal immigration problem we have change the law.

Those cities won't detain them.

If we are to fix the problem we have to ENFORCE the laws not allow cities to disobey them.

Much is being made of cities violating immigration law without specifically stating what the violation actually is. The 1996 immigration act mandates that local, state, or federal government can't prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual. There is no requirement in the law that requires local government to arrest, detain, investigate suspected violations of immigration law. However, there are other statutes that limit how long a person maybe detained and reason for detention as well what is required to transfer that person to other state or federal jurisdiction. This is why I'm saying you have to straighten out the laws. Local law enforcement is not going to use valuable resources to enforce federal immigration law without some legal mandate.

 

[bedowin62]

Funny thing the entire state of Texas is consider a sanctuary state for illegals, and I bet not many of you knew this...

It should not be a local officer job to find out if someone is here legally, and it should be the Federal Government job which they have failed to do countless of times before Obama and will keep on failing at after the nimrod is gone.

So passing a bill like that is just to punish liberal cities like Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, Austin and so on for failing to do what the Federal Government should have been doing all this time...

Instead of passing a bill like that why don't they start cracking down on companies and individuals that hire the illegals instead?

Oh wait that would mean cracking down on the GOP base that enjoy the illegal and paying them little while complaining they are stealing American Jobs...

Enforce the laws we already have and stop passing stupid garbage that is not needed...

Use E-verify, enforce immigration laws that are on the books, and fund the INS with the proper amount of money to hire agents to track down the illegals...

Oh why bother to use commonsense when it is easier to pass a bill that will be veto and used as political fire against the left instead?

Also for those that want a list of cities and states here you go:

List of Sanctuary cities

sanctuary cities - - Yahoo Search Results

Cities are supposed to hold illegals until they can be picked up by the feds.
They refused and the feds refuse to enforce immigration laws.

That is if they know the individual is illegal...

I knew someone that for years drove around with a legal drivers license with his actual name that was given to him by the state of California and then by the state of Texas and he even had a social security card issued to him with his actual name, and the guy was a illegal alien that overstayed his visa...

Now when the police pulled him over a few times how were they suppose to know he was illegal, and no he did not do anything illegal to obtain these ID's because there was a loophole in the laws back then that allowed him to fall through the cracks and he obtained his license to drive while on visa...

So how would a officer actually know if the person is illegal if they present legal documentation?

In the end it is the failure of the U.S. Government to enforce the laws on the books and putting any more burden on the local, county and state officers is just pure nonsense...

Now I do agree if the officer knows and let the person go then that is wrong too...

If they have the proper papers I can understand not catching them.
But as in the illegal that murdered the girl in san fran they knew damn well he was an illegal.

Despite the laws in Arizona, there is no state where a person must carry identification to prove they are entitled to be in the US. In fact, a person stopped on the street is not required by law to disclose citizenship or immigration status. So local law enforcement is often on very shaky grounds when they arrest and detain a person because they suspect violation of immigration laws.

are there laws saying it's illegal for law enforcement, or anybody else for that matter, to ask if somebody is here legally???

 

[bedowin62]

The 1996 immigration act mandates that local, state, or federal government can't prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual.

laws recently made in states like Arizona were designed to HELP, not hinder the federal government from carrying out it's enforcement of immigration laws.

the problem isnt restriction by anybody; it's that the federal government doesnt want to do it's job regarding current immigration and border security laws.

why do people lie to themselves?

 

[Flopper]

Funny thing the entire state of Texas is consider a sanctuary state for illegals, and I bet not many of you knew this...

It should not be a local officer job to find out if someone is here legally, and it should be the Federal Government job which they have failed to do countless of times before Obama and will keep on failing at after the nimrod is gone.

So passing a bill like that is just to punish liberal cities like Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, Austin and so on for failing to do what the Federal Government should have been doing all this time...

Instead of passing a bill like that why don't they start cracking down on companies and individuals that hire the illegals instead?

Oh wait that would mean cracking down on the GOP base that enjoy the illegal and paying them little while complaining they are stealing American Jobs...

Enforce the laws we already have and stop passing stupid garbage that is not needed...

Use E-verify, enforce immigration laws that are on the books, and fund the INS with the proper amount of money to hire agents to track down the illegals...

Oh why bother to use commonsense when it is easier to pass a bill that will be veto and used as political fire against the left instead?

Also for those that want a list of cities and states here you go:

List of Sanctuary cities

sanctuary cities - - Yahoo Search Results

Cities are supposed to hold illegals until they can be picked up by the feds.
They refused and the feds refuse to enforce immigration laws.

That is if they know the individual is illegal...

I knew someone that for years drove around with a legal drivers license with his actual name that was given to him by the state of California and then by the state of Texas and he even had a social security card issued to him with his actual name, and the guy was a illegal alien that overstayed his visa...

Now when the police pulled him over a few times how were they suppose to know he was illegal, and no he did not do anything illegal to obtain these ID's because there was a loophole in the laws back then that allowed him to fall through the cracks and he obtained his license to drive while on visa...

So how would a officer actually know if the person is illegal if they present legal documentation?

In the end it is the failure of the U.S. Government to enforce the laws on the books and putting any more burden on the local, county and state officers is just pure nonsense...

Now I do agree if the officer knows and let the person go then that is wrong too...

If they have the proper papers I can understand not catching them.
But as in the illegal that murdered the girl in san fran they knew damn well he was an illegal.

Despite the laws in Arizona, there is no state where a person must carry identification to prove they are entitled to be in the US. In fact, a person stopped on the street is not required by law to disclose citizenship or immigration status. So local law enforcement is often on very shaky grounds when they arrest and detain a person because they suspect violation of immigration laws.

are there laws saying it's illegal for law enforcement, or anybody else for that matter, to ask if somebody is here legally???

I don't think there is any law prohibiting police from asking a person if they are in the country illegally. However, the person certainly doesn't have to answer and there failure to answer can't be used against them in a court of law because undocumented immigrants have 5th amendment rights.

 

[bedowin62]

Cities are supposed to hold illegals until they can be picked up by the feds.
They refused and the feds refuse to enforce immigration laws.

That is if they know the individual is illegal...

I knew someone that for years drove around with a legal drivers license with his actual name that was given to him by the state of California and then by the state of Texas and he even had a social security card issued to him with his actual name, and the guy was a illegal alien that overstayed his visa...

Now when the police pulled him over a few times how were they suppose to know he was illegal, and no he did not do anything illegal to obtain these ID's because there was a loophole in the laws back then that allowed him to fall through the cracks and he obtained his license to drive while on visa...

So how would a officer actually know if the person is illegal if they present legal documentation?

In the end it is the failure of the U.S. Government to enforce the laws on the books and putting any more burden on the local, county and state officers is just pure nonsense...

Now I do agree if the officer knows and let the person go then that is wrong too...

If they have the proper papers I can understand not catching them.
But as in the illegal that murdered the girl in san fran they knew damn well he was an illegal.

Despite the laws in Arizona, there is no state where a person must carry identification to prove they are entitled to be in the US. In fact, a person stopped on the street is not required by law to disclose citizenship or immigration status. So local law enforcement is often on very shaky grounds when they arrest and detain a person because they suspect violation of immigration laws.

are there laws saying it's illegal for law enforcement, or anybody else for that matter, to ask if somebody is here legally???

I don't think there is any law prohibiting police from asking a person if they are in the country illegally. However, the person certainly doesn't have to answer and there failure to answer can't be used against them in a court of law because undocumented immigrants have 5th amendment rights.

what would they be in court for where that could be used against them if they were already found to be illegal? where would they be in court just for not answering the question???

 

[Flopper]

That is if they know the individual is illegal...

I knew someone that for years drove around with a legal drivers license with his actual name that was given to him by the state of California and then by the state of Texas and he even had a social security card issued to him with his actual name, and the guy was a illegal alien that overstayed his visa...

Now when the police pulled him over a few times how were they suppose to know he was illegal, and no he did not do anything illegal to obtain these ID's because there was a loophole in the laws back then that allowed him to fall through the cracks and he obtained his license to drive while on visa...

So how would a officer actually know if the person is illegal if they present legal documentation?

In the end it is the failure of the U.S. Government to enforce the laws on the books and putting any more burden on the local, county and state officers is just pure nonsense...

Now I do agree if the officer knows and let the person go then that is wrong too...

If they have the proper papers I can understand not catching them.
But as in the illegal that murdered the girl in san fran they knew damn well he was an illegal.

Despite the laws in Arizona, there is no state where a person must carry identification to prove they are entitled to be in the US. In fact, a person stopped on the street is not required by law to disclose citizenship or immigration status. So local law enforcement is often on very shaky grounds when they arrest and detain a person because they suspect violation of immigration laws.

are there laws saying it's illegal for law enforcement, or anybody else for that matter, to ask if somebody is here legally???

I don't think there is any law prohibiting police from asking a person if they are in the country illegally. However, the person certainly doesn't have to answer and there failure to answer can't be used against them in a court of law because undocumented immigrants have 5th amendment rights.

what would they be in court for where that could be used against them if they were already found to be illegal? where would they be in court just for not answering the question???

I'm saying if a law enforcement officer ask a person if they are legally in the country, they refuse answer, and they are brought to immigration court, the fact that they refused to answer the question can't be used against them.

Here are some statistics that might clarify a few things.
ICE conducted 314,943 removals in 2014.
ICE conducted 213,719 removals of individuals apprehended while attempting to unlawfully enter the United States. The remainder of the removals were from interior of the country. Of those 85% were convicted felons.

Only 23,000 voluntarily left the US. The remainder were removed via a deportation order signed by an immigration judge.

FY 2014 ICE Immigration Removals

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

If they have the proper papers I can understand not catching them.
But as in the illegal that murdered the girl in san fran they knew damn well he was an illegal.

Despite the laws in Arizona, there is no state where a person must carry identification to prove they are entitled to be in the US. In fact, a person stopped on the street is not required by law to disclose citizenship or immigration status. So local law enforcement is often on very shaky grounds when they arrest and detain a person because they suspect violation of immigration laws.

are there laws saying it's illegal for law enforcement, or anybody else for that matter, to ask if somebody is here legally???

I don't think there is any law prohibiting police from asking a person if they are in the country illegally. However, the person certainly doesn't have to answer and there failure to answer can't be used against them in a court of law because undocumented immigrants have 5th amendment rights.

what would they be in court for where that could be used against them if they were already found to be illegal? where would they be in court just for not answering the question???

I'm saying if a law enforcement officer ask a person if they are legally in the country, they refuse answer, and they are brought to immigration court, the fact that they refused to answer the question can't be used against them.

Here are some statistics that might clarify a few things.
ICE conducted 314,943 removals in 2014.
ICE conducted 213,719 removals of individuals apprehended while attempting to unlawfully enter the United States. The remainder of the removals were from interior of the country. Of those 85% were convicted felons.

Only 23,000 voluntarily left the US. The remainder were removed via a deportation order signed by an immigration judge.

FY 2014 ICE Immigration Removals

Correct.

Those undocumented are entitled to due process of the law, including the right to not self-incriminate.

Absence of documentation, or refusing to answer if questioned about documentation, is not 'proof' one is illegally in the country; refugees and asylees are allowed up to 30 days to apply for refugee or aslyee status, and may not be subject to punitive measures while those applications are pending.

Again: that one is undocumented does not mean he is 'illegal.'

 

[bedowin62]

Despite the laws in Arizona, there is no state where a person must carry identification to prove they are entitled to be in the US. In fact, a person stopped on the street is not required by law to disclose citizenship or immigration status. So local law enforcement is often on very shaky grounds when they arrest and detain a person because they suspect violation of immigration laws.

are there laws saying it's illegal for law enforcement, or anybody else for that matter, to ask if somebody is here legally???

I don't think there is any law prohibiting police from asking a person if they are in the country illegally. However, the person certainly doesn't have to answer and there failure to answer can't be used against them in a court of law because undocumented immigrants have 5th amendment rights.

what would they be in court for where that could be used against them if they were already found to be illegal? where would they be in court just for not answering the question???

I'm saying if a law enforcement officer ask a person if they are legally in the country, they refuse answer, and they are brought to immigration court, the fact that they refused to answer the question can't be used against them.

Here are some statistics that might clarify a few things.
ICE conducted 314,943 removals in 2014.
ICE conducted 213,719 removals of individuals apprehended while attempting to unlawfully enter the United States. The remainder of the removals were from interior of the country. Of those 85% were convicted felons.

Only 23,000 voluntarily left the US. The remainder were removed via a deportation order signed by an immigration judge.

FY 2014 ICE Immigration Removals

Correct.

Those undocumented are entitled to due process of the law, including the right to not self-incriminate.

Absence of documentation, or refusing to answer if questioned about documentation, is not 'proof' one is illegally in the country; refugees and asylees are allowed up to 30 days to apply for refugee or aslyee status, and may not be subject to punitive measures while those applications are pending.

Again: that one is undocumented does not mean he is 'illegal.'

as usual you losers on the Left are saying a whole bunch of nothing. nobody disputed they dont have to answer if they are here legally. can any of you idiots debate something without using a straw man?

straw man arguments aside; how does what you are whining about equate to it being a good idea to SHELTER CRIMINAL ILLEGALS FROM US IMMIGRATION LAWS??? seriously idiot how do you get there from just saying illegals dont have to self-identify as illegals??

 

[Stephanie]

This why the left and their snake Democrat politicians are for the ILLEGAL immigrant OVER YOU the American citizen. this professor spilled the beans. NOW OPEN your eyes citizens of this country before it's too late. and you Democrat voters need to open your eyes to your SNAKES you have elected and vote for. Replace gun rights to ALL OF OUR RIGHTS

snip:
Professor: Replacing white people to kill gun rights
Says just a matter of time before demographics take over
A professor at UCLA School of Law, writing for the Washington Post, says the battle over the Second Amendment will be won by progressives in the coming years, thanks to a secret weapon.


In his op-ed, “The NRA will fall. It’s inevitable,” Winkler argues the demographic transformation of America underway for 30 years through mass immigration – both legal and illegal – assures that the fervor Americans have for the Second Amendment will eventually run out of gas.

Why? The answer lies in the numbers, he says.




ALL of it here
Read more at Professor: Left has secret weapon to kill gun rights

 

[Kondor3]

...So in essence, Obama is going to veto a bill that says the Sanctuary Cities need to follow the law...

If true, then...

Of course Obama is threatening to do just that...

It goes against his pro-Illegals agenda...

This bend-over-and-grab-your-ankles-for-the-Illegals attitude is why somebody like Trump is doing so well at present...

Blowback - on a very large scale - is already very visible...

The American People are tired of this mollycoddle-the-Illegals shit...

That changes, on January 20, 2017...

 

[Stephanie]

...So in essence, Obama is going to veto a bill that says the Sanctuary Cities need to follow the law...

If true, then...

Of course Obama is threatening to do just that...

It goes against his pro-Illegals agenda...

This bend-over-and-grab-your-ankles-for-the-Illegals attitude is why somebody like Trump is doing so well at present...

Blowback - on a very large scale - is already very visible...

The American People are tired of this mollycoddle-the-Illegals shit...

That changes, on January 20, 2017...

that can't come soon enough. still give him a lot time to do a lot more damage

 

[Kondor3]

...So in essence, Obama is going to veto a bill that says the Sanctuary Cities need to follow the law...

If true, then...

Of course Obama is threatening to do just that...

It goes against his pro-Illegals agenda...

This bend-over-and-grab-your-ankles-for-the-Illegals attitude is why somebody like Trump is doing so well at present...

Blowback - on a very large scale - is already very visible...

The American People are tired of this mollycoddle-the-Illegals shit...

That changes, on January 20, 2017...

that can't come soon enough. still give him a lot time to do a lot more damage

True.

Scary stuff.

The rest of us have to keep the faith and hang-on, until the Community Organizer-Cheerleader goes home.

 

[Stephanie]

Get this: this party is filled with some of the nastiest people in this country
I'm sure the parents of EVERYONE killed every single day by not holding onto and deporting these ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS is thinking you snakes in charge who to an OATH to PROTECT US is wasting our time. unbelievable. how anyone can belong to that party as I call them now: the party of DEATH. first with abortions and now won't stop Illegal immigrants for KILLING us because they don't want to waste their time DEPORTING them

SNIP:
Harry Reid: 'Republicans Are Wasting the American People's Time' With Attempt to Detain Criminal Illegal Aliens
By Susan Jones | October 21, 2015 | 7:24 AM EDT
AddThis Sharing
88.8K3.5K
Shares
FacebookTwitterMore

.


A vigil for Kathryn Steinle took place on July 6, 2015, on Pier 14 in San Francisco. Steinle was gunned down while out for an evening stroll at Pier 14 with her father and a family friend on Wednesday, July 1. (AP Photo/Beck Diefenbach)


(CNSNews.com) - Senate Democrats on Tuesday blocked legislation that would have withheld funding for "sanctuary cities," which shield criminal illegal immigrants from federal immigration authorities.

ALL of from this puke party here
Harry Reid: 'Republicans Are Wasting the American People's Time' With Attempt to Detain Criminal Illegal Aliens

 

[bedowin62]

Despite the laws in Arizona, there is no state where a person must carry identification to prove they are entitled to be in the US. In fact, a person stopped on the street is not required by law to disclose citizenship or immigration status. So local law enforcement is often on very shaky grounds when they arrest and detain a person because they suspect violation of immigration laws.

are there laws saying it's illegal for law enforcement, or anybody else for that matter, to ask if somebody is here legally???

I don't think there is any law prohibiting police from asking a person if they are in the country illegally. However, the person certainly doesn't have to answer and there failure to answer can't be used against them in a court of law because undocumented immigrants have 5th amendment rights.

what would they be in court for where that could be used against them if they were already found to be illegal? where would they be in court just for not answering the question???

I'm saying if a law enforcement officer ask a person if they are legally in the country, they refuse answer, and they are brought to immigration court, the fact that they refused to answer the question can't be used against them.

Here are some statistics that might clarify a few things.
ICE conducted 314,943 removals in 2014.
ICE conducted 213,719 removals of individuals apprehended while attempting to unlawfully enter the United States. The remainder of the removals were from interior of the country. Of those 85% were convicted felons.

Only 23,000 voluntarily left the US. The remainder were removed via a deportation order signed by an immigration judge.

FY 2014 ICE Immigration Removals

Correct.

Those undocumented are entitled to due process of the law, including the right to not self-incriminate.

Absence of documentation, or refusing to answer if questioned about documentation, is not 'proof' one is illegally in the country; refugees and asylees are allowed up to 30 days to apply for refugee or aslyee status, and may not be subject to punitive measures while those applications are pending.

Again: that one is undocumented does not mean he is 'illegal.'

what an idiot. the right to not have to answer if you are here legally doesnt meant you arent here illegally either you dolt. you mindless morons actually seem to be making a case that because nobody should be asked, in your minds, if they are here legally or not, that just anybody should be allowed to be here illegally...........................

nobody is talking about refugees or asylees idiot