U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-10-2017, 10:55 PM
 
20,611 posts, read 12,282,218 times
Reputation: 5895

Advertisements

For one, thereís the pesky 1oth amendment to the Constitution, which says Washington canít force states to uphold federal laws. Sanctuary city proponents say it protects cities offering safe harbor to the undocumented. And in the past, the Supreme Court has agreed the federal government canít coerce state and local governments to act in a certain way by withholding funds, unless the money being held back is germane to a specific issue, Politifact reported. So, the government might be able to withhold law enforcement funds for cities that donít cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, but it might not be able to hold back money for public transit.

15 Sanctuary Cities That Trump Could Punish the Most

I'm guessing breaking Jim Crow 50 years ago using the feds was illegal? Tho NO southern state dared to talk back.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-11-2017, 06:56 AM
 
Location: Kansas
19,189 posts, read 14,068,763 times
Reputation: 18141
I could find nothing in the amendment to support what they were saying. Immigration is a federal issue, not a state issue. I see no way a state can defy federal law. Aren't they stupid though, crime in those sanctuary cities is over the top and they still don't get it.

Data in! Sanctuary cities have higher crime rates
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2017, 07:08 AM
 
2,967 posts, read 878,472 times
Reputation: 2333
I don't know what the fed subsidizes for the state but there are multiple benefits that illegal aliens are receiving such as schooling, drivers licenses, health care. Why did this work for speed limits and helmet laws but won't work this time?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2017, 07:13 AM
 
Location: Cape Cod
9,796 posts, read 7,106,581 times
Reputation: 17917
If the Libs want to live that way then let them. Take away the federal funding at least is what is allowed and let it be known why all of a sudden the citizens have to pay more in taxes to make up the lost money.

Trump could also let it be known when a crime is committed by a illegal alien.


Actually this situation would make for a good reality show like "Americas Most Wanted" or maybe a show like "Cops" or even a real life "Law and Order" where cases are followed from the crime to arrest through to the courts.

I think it would be a hit and it would highlight the crime that these sanctuary cities and states seem willing to place on their citizens. It might actually shame the politicians into action and wake up the sleeping people who are letting this happen.
It would also highlight the dangerous cities that the rest of us could avoid due to the crime rate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2017, 08:25 PM
 
Location: Texas
2,684 posts, read 1,307,316 times
Reputation: 2458
They just need to make massive cuts to programs that benefit sanctuary cities like section 8, grants to law enforcement and pet programs that benefit sanctuary cities.

If the courts won't let them make cuts just to sanctuary cities, just eliminate the particular grant program and it's all good.

The federal government has many of these silly grant programs from the Clinton and Obama administration on the books that are just wasted money anyway, if the courts won't let them reduce funds to these cities then they should just eliminate the program.

Many of the cities impacted most seem to be large cities (Chicago, New York, Los Angeles) and small, leftist high-poverty Northeastern cities like (Hartford, New Haven, Providence).

Many of these cities already have huge unfunded pension liabilities, tax bases that aren't keeping up thus it would be interesting the impact of large reductions in federal grants because these cities won't follow federal mandates.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2017, 05:20 AM
 
33,316 posts, read 14,548,317 times
Reputation: 7583
Quote:
Originally Posted by Packard fan View Post
For one, thereís the pesky 1oth amendment to the Constitution, which says Washington canít force states to uphold federal laws. Sanctuary city proponents say it protects cities offering safe harbor to the undocumented. And in the past, the Supreme Court has agreed the federal government canít coerce state and local governments to act in a certain way by withholding funds, unless the money being held back is germane to a specific issue, Politifact reported. So, the government might be able to withhold law enforcement funds for cities that donít cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, but it might not be able to hold back money for public transit.

15 Sanctuary Cities That Trump Could Punish the Most

I'm guessing breaking Jim Crow 50 years ago using the feds was illegal? Tho NO southern state dared to talk back.
There re MULTIPLE ways the fed can withhold Money..



  1. U.S. Code õ Title 8 õ Chapter 12 õ Subchapter II õ Part VIII õ ß 1324


8 U.S. Code ß 1324 - Bringing in and harboring certain aliens



"(a) Criminal penalties (1)
(A) Any person whoó (i) knowing that a person is an alien, brings to or attempts to bring to the United States in any manner whatsoever such person at a place other than a designated port of entry or place other than as designated by the Commissioner, regardless of whether such alien has received prior official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States and regardless of any future official action which may be taken with respect to such alien;

(ii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, transports, or moves or attempts to transport or move such alien within the United States by means of transportation or otherwise, in furtherance of such violation of law;

(iii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation;

(iv) encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law; or

(v) (I) engages in any conspiracy to commit any of the preceding acts, or

(II) aids or abets the commission of any of the preceding acts,


shall be punished as provided in subparagraph (B)."

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1324
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2017, 01:35 AM
 
Location: Florida
2,126 posts, read 469,039 times
Reputation: 597
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnywhereElse View Post
I could find nothing in the amendment to support what they were saying. Immigration is a federal issue, not a state issue. I see no way a state can defy federal law. Aren't they stupid though, crime in those sanctuary cities is over the top and they still don't get it.

Data in! Sanctuary cities have higher crime rates
The constitution is a federal issue too, yet the 14ht amendment that no one should be denied their rights regardless of state.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2017, 10:58 PM
 
Location: Earth
17,449 posts, read 22,959,819 times
Reputation: 7246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Packard fan View Post
For one, thereís the pesky 1oth amendment to the Constitution, which says Washington canít force states to uphold federal laws. Sanctuary city proponents say it protects cities offering safe harbor to the undocumented. And in the past, the Supreme Court has agreed the federal government canít coerce state and local governments to act in a certain way by withholding funds, unless the money being held back is germane to a specific issue, Politifact reported. So, the government might be able to withhold law enforcement funds for cities that donít cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, but it might not be able to hold back money for public transit.

15 Sanctuary Cities That Trump Could Punish the Most

I'm guessing breaking Jim Crow 50 years ago using the feds was illegal? Tho NO southern state dared to talk back.
Forgetting about Orval Faubus, George Wallace, and Lester Maddox?

Wallace did not make good on his threats because he knew he would be arrested by federal law enforcement for obstruction of justice if he followed through.

As harboring illegals is one of the crimes covered under RICO, it would be possible for federal law enforcement to arrest Garcetti, De Blasio, Lee, Schaaf, etc. and prosecute them under racketeering charges.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2017, 11:14 PM
 
20,611 posts, read 12,282,218 times
Reputation: 5895
Quote:
Originally Posted by majoun View Post
Forgetting about Orval Faubus, George Wallace, and Lester Maddox?

Wallace did not make good on his threats because he knew he would be arrested by federal law enforcement for obstruction of justice if he followed through.

As harboring illegals is one of the crimes covered under RICO, it would be possible for federal law enforcement to arrest Garcetti, De Blasio, Lee, Schaaf, etc. and prosecute them under racketeering charges.
Hell; Leander Perez and Bull Connor were also in some serious trouble in 1965. Had their kind TRIED to send the KKK against the feds; it would've been real ugly like you said.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top