Sanctuary cities

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

You are correct when you say there's a disconnect between federal and local laws. And do you know, in our republic, which law trumps which, in those situations? It's pretty explicit, it's in the supremacy clause. Not a lot of ambiguity.

Jim, the ICE detainer is a violation of the 4th Amendment unless there's a Federal arrest warrant.

I have never once heard anyone say that sanctuary cities are set up to fight crime.

I didn't say set up, I said why would communities do it if it wasn't.

This has been studied quite a bit and a lot of police seem to have a very positive perspective on sanctuary policies. I used that Google thing JohnR seems so fond of and found some interesting results:

http://www.policefoundation.org/cont...f-local-police

http://www.policylink.org/sites/defa...PORT_FINAL.PDF

http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/spe...-united-states

In this case, ICE told the authorities in San Francisco to notify them when they let the illegal alien go. ICE would have deported him, for the 7th time. San Francisco, being an enlightened, compassionate place (unlike the rest of the nation) specifically chose to ignore ICE's request, and that decision cost this girl, by all accounts a superb American, her life. And as enlightened as those city leaders are, they sure have been mum on this subject. Not a lot of courage there.

When the local prosecutor failed to charge him for his outstanding drug charge the authorities had no legal justification to hold him.

It's a sad case for sure, but if anything is another reason for immigration reform.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Jim, the ICE detainer is a violation of the 4th Amendment unless there's a Federal arrest warrant.


.

Do illegals get Constitutional protections? That's a sincere question. I would have thought not...

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Do illegals get Constitutional protections? That's a sincere question. I would have thought not...

Well they sure do although I don't believe they share all the rights citizens do.

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by spence

Well they sure do although I don't believe they share all the rights citizens do.

The Sanctuary Cities have more rights than you Spence. They can harbor
criminals without penalty. You can't. Try and harbor a criminal in your house or town and see how quick you go to jail.
So tell me , how is that part of the libs call for fairness?
.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by justplugit

The Sanctuary Cities have more rights than you Spence. They can harbor
criminals without penalty. You can't. Try and harbor a criminal in your house or town and see how quick you go to jail.
So tell me , how is that part of the libs call for fairness?
.

Simple, because victims deserve more fairness than the people who prey upon the victims. The illegal is the victim, ICE is the remorseless predator.

Right. Can I unilaterally declare my house to be a sanctuary from income tax? How long would I get away with that?

[spence]

Originally Posted by justplugit

The Sanctuary Cities have more rights than you Spence. They can harbor
criminals without penalty. You can't. Try and harbor a criminal in your house or town and see how quick you go to jail.
So tell me , how is that part of the libs call for fairness?
.

Simply not true.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by spence

Simply not true.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Please tell me where I'm going wrong.

[spence]

Originally Posted by justplugit

Please tell me where I'm going wrong.

Primarily because being on US soil illegally isn't a crime, it's a civil violation. If an undocumented person has criminal charges against them they certainly can be held, but when ICE requests a person be detained simply to evaluate deportation priority there isn't a lot of legal justification from what I've read.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I didn't say set up, I said why would communities do it if it wasn't.

.

Because one of the pillars of liberalism is that if one falls into a victim group (and currently, because Hispanics vote Democrat, they qualify) nothing they do is their fault. And for many liberals, defying the man, regardless of what the man is saying, is a badge of progressive honor. If you think that sounds stupid and crazy, I agree. But that's liberalism, at least on this issue. So what if a few superb Americans are sacrificed.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

When the local prosecutor failed to charge him for his outstanding drug charge the authorities had no legal justification to hold him.
.

Do you get any facts? He was deported after committing felonies here. As soon as he stepped foot back on American soil, he committed a crime, and ICE has the legal authority to detain him and ship his azz back.

Because the feds had a legal claim to him, they asked the local hippies officials to alert ICE if they let him go They weren't about to let this poor victim fall into the hands of the totalitarian folks at ICE, so they set him loose on that poor girl instead. Well done.

This is exactly why I say liberalism is a mental disorder. There is no rational reason to oppose the notion that illegals who commit felonies here, need to go. Build a one way, high speed train to Tierra Del Fuego.