A clear, direct & comprehensive defense of Sanctuary Cities

[Mac1958]

Could someone provide one?

Thanks.
.

 

[BluesLegend]

There is no defense, they are breaking federal law and American citizens are being killed, assaulted, raped, robbed, by these illegal invaders. They flood our country with drugs hurting our kids. They are a net loss costing us billions of dollars we don't have.

Let them lobby congress to change the immigration laws...they won't because that idea is DOA because the American people do not support it.

We will obey the existing laws or have anarchy...it won't be the latter.

 

[TNHarley]

emotion

 

[Weatherman2020]

 

[gipper]

Could someone provide one?

Thanks.
.

Not possible if you believe in a civil society, with rule of law.

If you do not believe in a civil society with rule of law, anything is possible.

 

[whitehall]

The criminals who authorized sanctuary cities were protected by the criminals in the Obama administration. There is a new Sheriff in town but the left wing criminals are reluctant to obey the law until they get their asses kicked.

 

[BluesLegend]

Illegals have killed more American citizens than were killed on 911, imagine politicians giving the 911 attackers sanctuary...exactly.

 

[TheDude]

You're asking libs to explain their position?

 

[OldLady]

emotion

No, it's finances. Cities have a large immigrant population. Big bunches of people leave, the economy flounders (even more than it already is). It's always money, TN.

 

[easyt65]

A clear, direct & comprehensive defense of Sanctuary Cities

Could someone provide one?

No

 

[g5000]

Could someone provide one?

Thanks.
.

Complying with federal requests to detain illegals is voluntary. Federal courts have already ruled on this fact.

Detaining illegals costs money.

If you want federal law enforced, then have the feds do it, and have the feds pay for it, and have the feds detain them.

See how easy that was?

 

[Yarddog]

emotion

No, it's finances. Cities have a large immigrant population. Big bunches of people leave, the economy flounders (even more than it already is). It's always money, TN.

Do you realize these cities protected violent criminals in jail from being deported? and many of them commited more crimes after they were released again on the streets? So explain how these people help the economy.

 

[TheDude]

Could someone provide one?

Thanks.
.

Complying with federal requests to detain illegals is voluntary. Federal courts have already ruled on this fact.

Detaining illegals costs money.

If you want federal law enforced, then have the feds do it, and have the feds pay for it, and have the feds detain them.

See how easy that was?

Fed assistance is also voluntary. Enjoy the ride.

 

[g5000]

Could someone provide one?

Thanks.
.

Complying with federal requests to detain illegals is voluntary. Federal courts have already ruled on this fact.

Detaining illegals costs money.

If you want federal law enforced, then have the feds do it, and have the feds pay for it, and have the feds detain them.

See how easy that was?

Fed assistance is also voluntary. Enjoy the ride.

If you want federal law enforced, then have the federal government enforce it.

I always knew you tards were not for states rights.

 

[Mac1958]

Could someone provide one?

Thanks.
.

Complying with federal requests to detain illegals is voluntary. Federal courts have already ruled on this fact.

Detaining illegals costs money.

If you want federal law enforced, then have the feds do it, and have the feds pay for it, and have the feds detain them.

See how easy that was?

That's it? It costs money?

So you're okay with protecting illegal aliens who are living in our country.

Why is that, specifically? Would, say, 100,000,000 be too many?
.

 

[g5000]

Could someone provide one?

Thanks.
.

Complying with federal requests to detain illegals is voluntary. Federal courts have already ruled on this fact.

Detaining illegals costs money.

If you want federal law enforced, then have the feds do it, and have the feds pay for it, and have the feds detain them.

See how easy that was?

That's it? It costs money?

Yes. A LOT of money.

It's a federal law, and you tards expect cities to pay for its enforcement.

So you're okay with protecting illegal aliens who are living in our country.

Sell your straw man fallacy to someone else.

You asked for an explanation. I gave it to you.

Don't ask the fucking question if you don't want to hear the answer.

 

[Mac1958]

Could someone provide one?

Thanks.
.

Complying with federal requests to detain illegals is voluntary. Federal courts have already ruled on this fact.

Detaining illegals costs money.

If you want federal law enforced, then have the feds do it, and have the feds pay for it, and have the feds detain them.

See how easy that was?

That's it? It costs money?

Yes. A LOT of money.

It's a federal law, and you tards expect cities to pay for its enforcement.

So you're okay with protecting illegal aliens who are living in our country.

Sell your straw man fallacy to someone else.

You asked for an explanation. I gave it to you.

Don't ask the fucking question if you don't want to hear the answer.

I think you avoided the question.

So I'll try again, and we'll see if you avoid it again.

So you're okay with protecting illegal aliens who are living in our country. Why is that, specifically?
.

 

[g5000]

Could someone provide one?

Thanks.
.

Complying with federal requests to detain illegals is voluntary. Federal courts have already ruled on this fact.

Detaining illegals costs money.

If you want federal law enforced, then have the feds do it, and have the feds pay for it, and have the feds detain them.

See how easy that was?

That's it? It costs money?

Yes. A LOT of money.

It's a federal law, and you tards expect cities to pay for its enforcement.

So you're okay with protecting illegal aliens who are living in our country.

Sell your straw man fallacy to someone else.

You asked for an explanation. I gave it to you.

Don't ask the fucking question if you don't want to hear the answer.

I think you avoided the question.

So I'll try again, and we'll see if you avoid it again.

So you're okay with protecting illegal aliens who are living in our country. Why is that, specifically?
.

I answered your question in the OP. You did not like the truth, so you then invented a straw man fallacy to which I will not dignify with a response, retard.

 

[g5000]

It's very simple, and yet it eludes the tards: If you want federal law enforced, then let the feds enforce it and bear the cost of the enforcement.

It's the federal government's job to protect and defend our borders, not the cities.

Why does this not penetrate the head of willfully stupid pseudocons? Beats me.

Write a bill to fund federal enforcement. "Operation Wetback". Wasn't that one of Trump's many promises?

 

[g5000]

I'm sorry I ruined your fantasy of an unsolvable enigma that turned out not to be.