San Fran City sues Trumper admin over sanctuary cities

[danielpalos]

Section 1324 if title 8 of the US code says it's a federal felony to encourage illegals to live here and the mayors of all these sanctuary cities are clearly doing that. Trump needs to makes some arrests and all this nonsense will stop.

they got our current president, elected in low population red States.

 

[danielpalos]

Section 1324 if title 8 of the US code says it's a federal felony to encourage illegals to live here and the mayors of all these sanctuary cities are clearly doing that. Trump needs to makes some arrests and all this nonsense will stop.

The courts have interpreted encourage to mean offer of a job, counseling an illegal immigrant to remain in the country, offer of assistance to evade authorities, etc. If the mayor is guilty then so is anyone who advocates against deportation or amnesty.

just national socialist right wingers fantasizing about a unitary form of federal government?

The general government has no police power over the several States.

 

[danielpalos]

last time I went to San Fransiko I couldn't believe the filth and the smell. What a shame.

did you tour the waste treatment facilities?

 

[danielpalos]

Section 1324 if title 8 of the US code says it's a federal felony to encourage illegals to live here and the mayors of all these sanctuary cities are clearly doing that. Trump needs to makes some arrests and all this nonsense will stop.

The courts have interpreted encourage to mean offer of a job, counseling an illegal immigrant to remain in the country, offer of assistance to evade authorities, etc. If the mayor is guilty then so is anyone who advocates against deportation or amnesty.

The cities by not providing information required by law to ICE are providing assistance in evading authorities. Now they have actually allocated a defense fund to help them do so.

the general government has no police power over the several States.

Only true, national socialists, do that.

 

[danielpalos]

City Of San Francisco Sues Trump Administration | Hoodline

The strategy, I think, is to drag this out and protect immigrants until Trump is impeached, leaves office, or dies normally, which ever comes first.

SF will get their little fagot asses kicked on this one. Federal law requires, as a condition to receiving grants, that the recipient be in compliance with federal laws. If they aren't in compliance they are not eligible for the grants to begin with. Just because other administrations haven't enforced that law, doesn't prevent Trump form doing so.

Nope, the courts will tie up the eligibility, leaving the status quo the way it was. Trump is not going to do anything about this as long as he is in office.

Where is it written that states or cities are obligated to get federal money for anything?

Yes, the lower activist courts may tie it up briefly, but once it hits the big time, the city will waste money that they don't have. And how many times have Democrats forced states into compliance for crap like the environment by withholding federal money?

Now Cali is considering calling themselves a sanctuary state. Okay, where are they going to makeup the 330 billion they get from the feds every year?

This will be like watching a prisoner in jail going on a hunger strike.

we pay more in taxes than we get back. it is red States that are the welfare queens.

Oh geez, more of the same from the desperate and confused Liberals.
California - 12% of the nations population, 33% of the nations welfare recipients - FACT
By the way Hawaii and New York are fighting CA for that number one spot....are they blue or red states? hahaha
Here you go:
It Looks Like Red States Take Most in Federal 'Welfare' from this Map. But Looks Can Be Deceiving.
California’s Welfare Benefits: Boom or Bust?
"There has been much discussion about immigrants in the United States from everywhere around the world. Yet, why is it that California seems to attract the most immigrants of any state? Indeed, while the state is only 12% of the nation’s population, it is home to 33% of welfare residents. According to a report published by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) on January 26, 2015, there is a correlation between generous welfare benefits and an increase in immigration.

In total, California outspends every other state in public welfare spending – in 2014, it spent $22.4 billion. In contrast, the next closest state, New York, spent $11.9 billion. That being said, does this make California a magnet for immigrants? Not necessarily. It is more of an anchor – a reason why residents stay for long periods of time in the state. However, to deny that there is no magnet would be incorrect. According to George J. Borjas, the Robert W. Scrivner Professor of Economics and Social Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School and the author of the aforementioned report, the reason as to why people decide to relocate is due to “income-maximizing behavior.” Immigrants have already accepted that there are certain fixed costs that are inevitable because of migration, so it is natural that they will flock towards the places with the highest benefits. Empirical evidence suggests that it is because of these differences that there are an increasingly disproportionate number of immigrants among states. While there is the possibility of alternative explanations for this phenomenon, the conclusion that Borjas draws using the wealth-maximization hypothesis is one such testable method.

However, upon closer examination, on a per-capita basis, California’s seemingly generous benefits pale in data comparison to other states. For example, it spends approximately $179 for every resident, behind $233 in Hawaii and $256 in New York. Furthermore, approximately 8.9% of California residents live in poverty, the highest of any state. Despite this, the number of people immigrating to California increases exponentially each year."

let's compare facts:

Oh geez, more of the same from the desperate and confused Liberals.
California - 12% of the nations population, 33% of the nations welfare recipients - FACT

And, even with ALL of that:

The economy of California is the largest in the United States. As of 2015, California's gross state product (GSP) is about $2.496 trillion. The state's GSP grew 4.1% in 2015.

Fact.

national socialist right wingers are just, lousy capitalists; that is all.

 

[danielpalos]

It takes a special kind of stupid to sue in order to avoid the law.

What law? We have a federal government to enforce federal law.

Remember the term special kind if stupid? You're wearing it.

The city is suing to not follow the law. It is an omission of guilt from the beginning.

We have a Tenth Amendment. And, we have Government, limited by a Constitution, not "executive orders".

 

[danielpalos]

City Of San Francisco Sues Trump Administration | Hoodline

The strategy, I think, is to drag this out and protect immigrants until Trump is impeached, leaves office, or dies normally, which ever comes first.

SF will get their little fagot asses kicked on this one. Federal law requires, as a condition to receiving grants, that the recipient be in compliance with federal laws. If they aren't in compliance they are not eligible for the grants to begin with. Just because other administrations haven't enforced that law, doesn't prevent Trump form doing so.

That is the whole point; we don't believe our current president is faithfully executing our federal Constitution.

Or, any of the civil rights acts.

how is President Trump not executing the federal constitution, and exactly what is the basis of your complaint for his not following any of the civil rights acts.

have you read any of them?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Section 1324 if title 8 of the US code says it's a federal felony to encourage illegals to live here and the mayors of all these sanctuary cities are clearly doing that. Trump needs to makes some arrests and all this nonsense will stop.

The courts have interpreted encourage to mean offer of a job, counseling an illegal immigrant to remain in the country, offer of assistance to evade authorities, etc. If the mayor is guilty then so is anyone who advocates against deportation or amnesty.

The cities by not providing information required by law to ICE are providing assistance in evading authorities. Now they have actually allocated a defense fund to help them do so.

the general government has no police power over the several States.

Only true, national socialists, do that.

Good quote. So I guess when DumBama ordered the defunding of schools who didn't let weirdos into girls locker rooms and showers, that was okay by your standards. That was not a "national socialist" policy.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

City Of San Francisco Sues Trump Administration | Hoodline

The strategy, I think, is to drag this out and protect immigrants until Trump is impeached, leaves office, or dies normally, which ever comes first.

SF will get their little fagot asses kicked on this one. Federal law requires, as a condition to receiving grants, that the recipient be in compliance with federal laws. If they aren't in compliance they are not eligible for the grants to begin with. Just because other administrations haven't enforced that law, doesn't prevent Trump form doing so.

That is the whole point; we don't believe our current president is faithfully executing our federal Constitution.

Or, any of the civil rights acts.

how is President Trump not executing the federal constitution, and exactly what is the basis of your complaint for his not following any of the civil rights acts.

have you read any of them?

I have honestly seen nothing that is in violation of the constitution or the civil rights act yet. thats why Im asking. If you point them out I can look at them and then decide if its bullshit or if I should become upset with what he is doing.
For one, Ive been traveling for the last couple of weeks so Im just a bit behind on some of the news, I just got home yesterday as a matter of fact, I completed my trip by driving back to Maryland from Tampa Florida. Off topic, it is not as pleasant of a drive as you might like to think, should I do that again I think I will break it into two days driving instead of the straight through that I did. Im not 20 anymore and the age is starting to show when it comes to these things.
But, back to the point, what exactly did he do that obviously violates the constitution or the civil rights. I would be really pissed off to hear that he has set civil rights back at all, the fight to get here was entirely too hard for any ground to be lost at this point. Not being a registered member of either party and being open minded gives me the ability to change my opinion of President Trump at a moments notice. My loyalty is not to a party or any single man, my loyalty is to what I think is right.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

It takes a special kind of stupid to sue in order to avoid the law.

The "Law" in Nazi Germany said it's OK to gas Jews. It takes a special kid of stupid to blindly abide by all laws without ever asking questions. This is another reason why Libs are always calling you guys fascists. You have those tendencies

Last time I checked, progressives and fascists were hand in hand, praising each other.

It doesn't surprise me, "libs" are calling everyone else every name that they used to be.

So, is he equating the gassing of Jews with a temporary travel ban?

Not quite. He seems to be equating gassing of Jews to enforcing legitimate laws against the harboring of invading foreign criminals.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

City Of San Francisco Sues Trump Administration | Hoodline

The strategy, I think, is to drag this out and protect immigrants until Trump is impeached, leaves office, or dies normally, which ever comes first.

Jake supports sedition

Wow

Just wow

That surprises you? I guess you haven't been paying attention to him. He's consistently taken the side of this nation's enemies, against that of this nation and its people. This latest from him is entirely consistent with his previous positions.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

The city is suing to not follow the law. It is an omission [sic] of guilt from the beginning.

We have a Tenth Amendment. And, we have Government, limited by a Constitution, not "executive orders".

Defense of the nation against foreign attack is a responsibility that the Constitution explicitly assigns to the federal government, and therefore, which is not withheld from it by the Tenth Amendment.

State and city officials, committing treason by using the power of their positions to give aid and comfort to invading foreign criminals will find no defense in the Tenth Amendment.

 

[OKTexas]

SF will get their little fagot asses kicked on this one. Federal law requires, as a condition to receiving grants, that the recipient be in compliance with federal laws. If they aren't in compliance they are not eligible for the grants to begin with. Just because other administrations haven't enforced that law, doesn't prevent Trump form doing so.

That is the whole point; we don't believe our current president is faithfully executing our federal Constitution.

Or, any of the civil rights acts.

Cities have no constitutional right to grants from the feds, in my opinion grants are unconstitutional on their face, kicking back federal monies to States to buy votes just ain't right.

The general government is obligated to Pay the Debts, of the several, United States, especially when establishing federal standards.

Feel free to point where the Constitution says that.

Just reading comprehension challenged?

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Now child, read the remainder of Article 1, Section 8 to understand the limiting clauses. They tell you exactly what the authorized expenditures are.

 

[OKTexas]

Section 1324 if title 8 of the US code says it's a federal felony to encourage illegals to live here and the mayors of all these sanctuary cities are clearly doing that. Trump needs to makes some arrests and all this nonsense will stop.

The courts have interpreted encourage to mean offer of a job, counseling an illegal immigrant to remain in the country, offer of assistance to evade authorities, etc. If the mayor is guilty then so is anyone who advocates against deportation or amnesty.

just national socialist right wingers fantasizing about a unitary form of federal government?

The general government has no police power over the several States.

If that's the case, how can the president be charged with faithfully executing the laws.

 

[Flopper]

I don't know how much federal aid that California based Universities get but Trump should double down and cut off federal aid to Berkley until they get control over the students.

You can not deprive a state university, or a school district of federal funds because a city in the state refuses to cooperate with the federal government on immigration or because the president just doesn't like what the university is doing.

However, if S.F. refuses to render the specific cooperation specified in federal law, then some funds related to law enforcement could be withheld from the city. What funds are questionable? If an entity, say a school district receives federal funds for a project but fails to do that project or meet the requirements of the project the federal government can be take action. What the federal government can't do is to take funds from a project which is completely unrelated to immigration or from a totally different goverment entity.

 

[OKTexas]

I don't know how much federal aid that California based Universities get but Trump should double down and cut off federal aid to Berkley until they get control over the students.

You can not deprive a state university, or a school district of federal funds because a city in the state refuses to cooperate with the federal government on immigration or because the president just doesn't like what the university is doing.

However, if S.F. refuses to render the specific cooperation specified in federal law, then some funds related to law enforcement could be withheld from the city. What funds are questionable? If an entity, say a school district receives federal funds for a project but fails to do that project or meet the requirements of the project the federal government can be take action. What the federal government can't do is to take funds from a project which is completely unrelated to immigration or from a totally different goverment entity.

But they can withhold money form the schools police departments if they don't comply with federal law.

 

[oreo]

God Bless Texas! Abbott is doing the right thing. Next it needs to be done at the Federal level.

In "sanctuary" fight, Abbott cuts off funding to Travis County

In "sanctuary" fight, Abbott cuts off funding to Travis County

Gov. Greg Abbott has followed through on his threat to cut off state funding for Travis County over its new "sanctuary" policy.

I hope you're not a taxpayer of any other county in Texas, because there's going to be one hell of a lawsuit you're going to lose and end up paying for.

Sometimes these governors can cost the taxpayers millions, because they do stupid things like this.

A "Sanctuary city" has not even been defined by law.

 

[KGB]

I don't know how much federal aid that California based Universities get but Trump should double down and cut off federal aid to Berkley until they get control over the students.

You can not deprive a state university, or a school district of federal funds because a city in the state refuses to cooperate with the federal government on immigration or because the president just doesn't like what the university is doing.

However, if S.F. refuses to render the specific cooperation specified in federal law, then some funds related to law enforcement could be withheld from the city. What funds are questionable? If an entity, say a school district receives federal funds for a project but fails to do that project or meet the requirements of the project the federal government can be take action. What the federal government can't do is to take funds from a project which is completely unrelated to immigration or from a totally different goverment entity.

Sure can. Appropriations such as these are line items in the budget. Congress controls the purse. It passes a budget cutting out these line items, the President signs it & it becomes law. Happens all the time.

 

[12icer]

The Department of education can pull the accreditation of ANY SCHOOL, or school district it deems to have violated any of the educational or federal regulations including the civil rights of any group of students. KACHING liberal universities that deny freedom of expression CAN lose their accreditation. FEDERAL money can be used as the congress wishes, and regulations can be enforced at the Presidents will by executive orders. The National Guard can be federalized, and placed into any vanue to FORCE Federal compliance, As in the James Meredith \ Mississippi State Brown Vs Board of Education ETC. Get over your crazy fantasy liberals, YOU will comply or go to jail, or my favorite solution >>> DIE.

 

[Flopper]

Section 1324 if title 8 of the US code says it's a federal felony to encourage illegals to live here and the mayors of all these sanctuary cities are clearly doing that. Trump needs to makes some arrests and all this nonsense will stop.

The courts have interpreted encourage to mean offer of a job, counseling an illegal immigrant to remain in the country, offer of assistance to evade authorities, etc. If the mayor is guilty then so is anyone who advocates against deportation or amnesty.

The cities by not providing information required by law to ICE are providing assistance in evading authorities. Now they have actually allocated a defense fund to help them do so.

A city that does not collect and maintain citizenship information can not be required to provide what it does have and it can not be required to collect it under existing law.

Setting up a defense fund can not be considered encouragement because such funds are used to provide a defense for the accused. If providing a defense fund is considered encouragement to illegal immigration then certainly providing a defense would also thus all immigration attorneys would be guilty.