Yet Another Rightwing Lie: ‘Sanctuary’ Cities

[Steelfoot]

I never once claimed that. Stop lying.

You are making a very poor impression on us.

Know what we mean?

 

[SavannahMann]

Article 6 section 2: Any state law that conflicts with federal law is unconstitutional.
The very act of providing sanctuary to criminals is illegal. A sanctuary city or state has no way to keep their criminals from migrating to other cities and states. They are putting the rest of us at risk. Shut them down.

The term Sanctuary means that the local authorities will not assist the Federal Authorities. The Federal Authorities are still able to affect arrests. What the locals are saying is that ICE is on its own.

That's like saying the DEA is on it's own when they go after heroin shipments. Federal agencies need co-operation from local agencies to be effective. Knowingly harboring lawlessness is illegal. Mayors need to be in the federal pen and no federal dollars until the outlaw cities get with the program. Immigration law is not supposed to be dictated to us by left wing activists.

The DEA is on their own regarding marijuana in states that have legalized it. The local cops do not participate. The DEA can still arrest people. The States haven't changed federal law.

In the case Arizona Versus the United States the Supreme Court affirmed what the rest of us have always known. The Federal Government has the power regarding immigration. They struck down three of the four challenged parts. The only thing they left was that the right of police to ask about immigration status. The police could detain a person for a while, but not indefinitely.

Arizona v. United States - Wikipedia

The Supreme Court said Immigration was the Federal Governments to enforce and implement.

Sanctuary Cities is an inaccurate name. Like the term Civil War for the United States. The Sanctuary Cities are just doing the opposite of Arizona. They are taking a don't ask don't tell approach to immigration.

Now the Feds can cut the grants to the cities and states that don't want to comply with their requests. But as for bringing the hammer down, that just isn't going to happen. The chances of getting a conviction by a jury is virtually nil.

You are right about one thing. The Federal Agents need the assistance of the local cops. There aren't many Federal Agents in most cities and without that local help the cases drop to tiny fractions of cases.

The ICE agents are still able to arrest people. They just don't have a dozen local cops assisting in the raids. Which is why the DEA has virtually ceased enforcement of Marijuana laws in states that have legalized it.

Problem is being a US citizen is not a state issue. The DEA could go after pot if they wanted to though.

The Sanctuary Cities are not making it a state issue. They are merely washing their hands of it. Just like the DEA and Marijuana they are not denying or preventing the Federal Authorities from taking whatever action the law requires. They are merely standing aside.

The DEA can and does make arrests for Marijuana in those states. Not many because without the information from and the support of the local cops the cases are difficult to proceed on. Then the effort may be wasted if the Jury decides to acquit which is more likely in those jurisdictions. The DEA instead focuses on the other drugs, cases where they can get assistance from the locals.

Personally I believe it is illegal immigration not undocumented whatever. But I am a believer in States Rights. Not just on issues like Guns, but all issues. If it is a Federal Law it is a Federal Responsibility. Not a state or city responsibility.

Now Trump has taken the one action that he could take. That is to cut the grants to those cities. The cities have the option of waving bye bye to those grants.

The cities and states can cut assistance to other federal agencies if they wish to retaliate. The BATFE could find themselves conducting raids without assistance. The FBI could find requests dumped into the trash. The locals provide a lot of support to the Feds on many different types of investigations.

Imagine this. A bank gets robbed. The FBI shows up and the locals just leave. The request for assistance in an interstate mail fraud case goes unanswered. SWAT support for DEA raids just never shows up.

This would be legal. I think that Trump is trying to give the Sanctuary Cities an out by announcing the Dreamers are going to be protected at the same time as threatening to remove the Grants from the cities.

Trump’s Soft Spot for Dreamers Alienates Immigration Hard-Liners

This gives the Sanctuary Cities a ladder to climb down on, and removes one of the arguments that the cities used as justification for their stance.

 

[Iceweasel]

This would be legal. I think that Trump is trying to give the Sanctuary Cities an out by announcing the Dreamers are going to be protected at the same time as threatening to remove the Grants from the cities.

Trump’s Soft Spot for Dreamers Alienates Immigration Hard-Liners

This gives the Sanctuary Cities a ladder to climb down on, and removes one of the arguments that the cities used as justification for their stance.

If they are announcing they are outlaw cities then they are inviting illegals so encouraging illegal activity. BTW it's way down from what it was a few months ago. I wonder why.

 

[Mac1958]

I never once claimed that. Stop lying.

Um, I meant the OP.
.

 

[miketx]

Sorry. No problemo.

 

[SavannahMann]

This would be legal. I think that Trump is trying to give the Sanctuary Cities an out by announcing the Dreamers are going to be protected at the same time as threatening to remove the Grants from the cities.

Trump’s Soft Spot for Dreamers Alienates Immigration Hard-Liners

This gives the Sanctuary Cities a ladder to climb down on, and removes one of the arguments that the cities used as justification for their stance.

If they are announcing they are outlaw cities then they are inviting illegals so encouraging illegal activity. BTW it's way down from what it was a few months ago. I wonder why.

That was the same argument made when legalizing marijuana was proposed. It was silly then and just as silly now.

I think they are going after the biggest cities first. The principle is easy enough to understand. Take out the leaders and the rest will fall in line. New York, Chicago, and the rest have the most to lose regarding grants. So they have the biggest incentive to give in. The danger for Trump here is the future. If he does cut funds, and a Terrorist attack strikes, the blame in the Press will be how he cut funding for anti-terrorism investigators. That would be especially damaging if the terrorists are either citizens or people who cleared ICE and were here legally like the 9-11 attackers.

On the other hand if the cities fold using the DReamer excuse TRump can't placate the hardliners later.

 

[Steelfoot]

The roundup of so-called "Dreamers" -- the loathsome spawn of vile Third World excrement -- shall soon commence.

Know what we mean?