Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why not just do the right thing and follow the law .
They are trying to claim being anti sanctuary city is unconstitutional .
Ironic a state attorney that is supposed to uphold the law would disrespect federal LAW.
Also how do sanctuary cities ensure public safety when they let illegal criminals back on the streets ?
---
The amicus brief filed Wednesday says Trump's order threatens to withdraw federal funds from states and cities that don't help the federal government enforce immigration laws.
Santa Clara County last month asked a federal judge to block Trump's executive order threatening the loss of nearly $1.7 billion in federal funds to local governments.
Becerra says he has a responsibility to protect state laws and policies that ensure public safety and protect the constitutional rights of residents.
So Trump is going to withhold critical funding to cities because they disagree with his harsh immigration policies? States and local government SHOULD not be force to enforce immigration law. I bet any federal judge will agree.
So Trump is going to withhold critical funding to cities because they disagree with his harsh immigration policies? States and local government SHOULD not be force to enforce immigration law. I bet any federal judge will agree.
Having a policy that immigration laws are enforced is harsh?
Why not just do the right thing and follow the law .
They are trying to claim being anti sanctuary city is unconstitutional .
Ironic a state attorney that is supposed to uphold the law would disrespect federal LAW.
Also how do sanctuary cities ensure public safety when they let illegal criminals back on the streets ?
---
The amicus brief filed Wednesday says Trump's order threatens to withdraw federal funds from states and cities that don't help the federal government enforce immigration laws.
Santa Clara County last month asked a federal judge to block Trump's executive order threatening the loss of nearly $1.7 billion in federal funds to local governments.
Becerra says he has a responsibility to protect state laws and policies that ensure public safety and protect the constitutional rights of residents. California joins suit against defunding of sanctuary cities
It is unconstitutional for Trump to try to withhold all federal funding from Cities or Counties that don't automatically honor ICE detainers. There is no requirement that States enforce federal law. ICE agents are free to sit in the jail parking lot and arrest people as they are released. Federal funding can only be withheld when the funds are directly related to the activity the feds are trying to regulate and they can't be used to coerce or force a state to act contrary to it's interests How Sanctuary Cities Plan to Dodge President Trump's Funding Cuts | Fortune.com
Not to mention there have been several federal courts that have ruled that holding a person on an ICE detainer is a violation of the person's 4th amendment rights and that the jail honoring the hold can be held liable for damages. https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/f..._am_limits.pdf
Trump is the one who needs to do the right thing and act like a President not like some bloated dissipated petty banana republic dictator.
Having a policy that immigration laws are enforced is harsh?
No city or county is trying to prevent the enforcement of immigration laws, do some research. There is no immigration law that requires law enforcement to question a person about their citizenship, and ICE detainers lack probable cause and do not constitute a legal arrest warrant
So Trump is going to withhold critical funding to cities because they disagree with his harsh immigration policies? States and local government SHOULD not be force to enforce immigration law. I bet any federal judge will agree.
No city or county is trying to prevent the enforcement of immigration laws, do some research. There is no immigration law that requires law enforcement to question a person about their citizenship, and ICE detainers lack probable cause and do not constitute a legal arrest warrant
Just curious why are you and other liberals so gung ho on protecting criminals?
Just curious why are you and other liberals so gung ho on protecting criminals?
I'm curious as to why you make such a specious claim. I worked in law enforcement for over two decades, I never 'protected criminals' then and I still don't. This is not about 'protecting criminals', it's about common sense.
ICE has known for 30 years that every time they try to force law enforcement to hold someone on an ICE detainer they are requiring that agency to break the law. ICE detainers do not meet the constitutional muster for keeping a person in jail and ICE even issued an advisory about that last year.
Law Enforcement personnel want to catch criminals and protect victims, something that becomes very difficult when you start asking crime victims and witnesses for their "papers" . All of a sudden they don't know who beat them up, they don't remember who fired the gun, or who molested the child because their freedom is being place in jeopardy just for talking to the Police.
It's quite clear that you do not understand what you are talking about, it would behoove you to do some research or talk to a local police officer.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
