Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-04-2015, 06:58 PM
 
4,899 posts, read 3,554,547 times
Reputation: 4471

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ringo1 View Post
A conservative Republican Judge sent the clerk to prison - not the 'liberals' .

Ask him.
and the clerk is a DEMOCRAT

must be confusing to righties
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-04-2015, 06:59 PM
 
4,899 posts, read 3,554,547 times
Reputation: 4471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veneficus View Post
Laws don't apply to Democrats.
you mean like the Democrat clerk Kim Davis?

maybe you're right
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2015, 07:01 PM
 
4,899 posts, read 3,554,547 times
Reputation: 4471
FWIW, I am not a fan of so-called sanctuary cities who claim they don't need to cooperate with ICE. It's setting a dangerous precedent - not to mention burdening the taxpayers of those cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2015, 07:02 PM
 
20,524 posts, read 15,903,758 times
Reputation: 5948
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTHokieFan View Post
Sort of like the Kentucky Clerk for failing to uphold laws. I know, I know "it's different."
I picked up on that too. If Davis can be cuffed and stuffed; why ain't the "powers to be" treated that same way when failing to detain illegal aliens? Big time double standard.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2015, 07:04 PM
 
20,524 posts, read 15,903,758 times
Reputation: 5948
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
"They need to be sued by the Fed to force compliance." Wrong!

As when the Fed mandate a 55 MPH speed limit, those states that refused to comply were DENIED federal funds.

The same should be applied to sanctuary cities.

Cut off the money and watch how fast the change their tune.
Agreed and HOW!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2015, 07:49 PM
 
7,578 posts, read 5,326,422 times
Reputation: 9447
Not to be repetitive:


Quote:
Originally Posted by Northeastah View Post
FWIW, I am not a fan of so-called sanctuary cities who claim they don't need to cooperate with ICE. It's setting a dangerous precedent - not to mention burdening the taxpayers of those cities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWiseWino View Post
Ok, ok... here's my take.

Sanctuary laws are meaningless because, state and local government lack authority to enforce immigration laws. So what does it mean that local or state governments don't enforce laws that they don't have the authority to enforce in the first place? Nothing!

In point of fact, the Court has ruled that enforcement of immigration laws are the sole purview of the Federal government and went so far as to prohibit states from enacting laws for the enforcement of the nation's immigration laws and provides no authority for state or local law enforcement to enforce existing Federal statues finding, and I quote, "As a general rule, it is not a crime for a removable alien to remain in the United States."

Arizona v. United States 567 U.S. ___ (2012)

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/567/11-182/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2015, 07:51 PM
 
62,959 posts, read 29,141,740 times
Reputation: 18589
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWiseWino View Post
Ok, ok... here's my take.

Sanctuary laws are meaningless because, state and local government lack authority to enforce immigration laws. So what does it mean that local or state governments don't enforce laws that they don't have the authority to enforce in the first place? Nothing!

In point of fact, the Court has ruled that enforcement of immigration laws are the sole purview of the Federal government and went so far as to prohibit states from enacting laws for the enforcement of the nation's immigration laws and provides no authority for state or local law enforcement to enforce existing Federal statues finding, and I quote, "As a general rule, it is not a crime for a removable alien to remain in the United States."

Arizona v. United States 567 U.S. ___ (2012)

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/567/11-182/
No, what these cities are doing is defying federal laws by aiding and abetting illegal aliens.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2015, 08:22 PM
 
Location: Honolulu/DMV Area/NYC
30,638 posts, read 18,227,675 times
Reputation: 34509
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTHokieFan View Post
Sort of like the Kentucky Clerk for failing to uphold laws. I know, I know "it's different."
While I'm as upset about sanctuary cities as are you, the answer to your question is rather simple: federalism. State officials cannot be made to enforce federal law as a general matter, something that the Supreme Court has held on various occasions (its called the anti-commandeering doctrine). The only exceptions are when federal laws are imputed on the states by the Constitution itself, as is the case with 14th Amendment EPC issues, and most of the Bill of Rights.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2015, 08:36 PM
 
1,603 posts, read 1,113,526 times
Reputation: 1175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northeastah View Post
you mean like the Democrat clerk Kim Davis?

maybe you're right
I am always right.



you can see this in the Obama white house on a daily basis, and around state capitals unfortunate enough to be run by the vile Democrats.

Last edited by CaseyB; 09-05-2015 at 04:23 AM.. Reason: flaming
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2015, 08:37 PM
 
20,524 posts, read 15,903,758 times
Reputation: 5948
Quote:
Originally Posted by prospectheightsresident View Post
While I'm as upset about sanctuary cities as are you, the answer to your question is rather simple: federalism. State officials cannot be made to enforce federal law as a general matter, something that the Supreme Court has held on various occasions (its called the anti-commandeering doctrine). The only exceptions are when federal laws are imputed on the states by the Constitution itself, as is the case with 14th Amendment EPC issues, and most of the Bill of Rights.
Sanctuary cities: if the feds cut OFF funding; I have a feeling they'd fall in line real quick in treating illegal aliens as the lawbreakers they are.
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:02 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top