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.
Federal authorities said the grant program, created in 2000, awarded border states a total of $30 million in the past fiscal year. In addition to going to the San Francisco district attorney's office, funds from the program also helped defray the costs of jailing and defending criminal suspects in the city whose cases the city listed in its application as federally generated.
As a sanctuary city, San Francisco is committed to not assisting federal authorities in immigration-related cases. While some border-related crime might involve illegal immigrants, border law enforcement agencies have long been able to bill federal authorities for many other crimes not related to illegal border crossings.
California may think they are above the law and they are finding out that they are not. I say no fed money to any city or state that refuses to enforce, or cooperate with the enforcement of Fed laws including imigration.
California may think they are above the law and they are finding out that they are not. I say no fed money to any city or state that refuses to enforce, or cooperate with the enforcement of Fed laws including imigration.
San Francisco should pay the money back. I would bet that not ALL the citizens of that city agree with its sanctuary statement. In fact, I would even bet that the majority of citizens in California do not agree with the so-called sanctuary stand that some cities have made.
San Francisco should pay the money back. I would bet that not ALL the citizens of that city agree with its sanctuary statement. In fact, I would even bet that the majority of citizens in California do not agree with the so-called sanctuary stand that some cities have made.
Of course, you all want that to be about immigration, which it is NOT.
You want it to be about San Francisco granting sanctuary, which it is NOT.
It is about the prosecution of drug smugglers and the failure to follow some guide lines in requesting that funding.
I'm not against your desire to penalize people who think they are doing good, but why don't you find something accurate to preach about and rally behind, instead of twisting the truth to fit your goals?
Of course, you all want that to be about immigration, which it is NOT.
You want it to be about San Francisco granting sanctuary, which it is NOT.
It is about the prosecution of drug smugglers and the failure to follow some guide lines in requesting that funding.
I'm not against your desire to penalize people who think they are doing good, but why don't you find something accurate to preach about and rally behind, instead of twisting the truth to fit your goals?
yes, you are right! Since preachingtothechoir started this topic can
we all say AMEN to Dave's post.
As of March of last year, the city claimed it had handled more than 2,241 such cases, but a federal audit released this week found that none of the cases had been referred by federal officials to District Attorney Kamala Harris' office as required under the program
They mis handled or other wise didn't follow the federal requirements and the penalty can be refund the money.
I also found it interesting latter in the article that it has been referred to the justice department for possible "criminal" investigation.
It isnt about immigration but about the drug wars. Regardless, I hope they get whacked.
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.