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.
What resources are required to just pick up the phone and call ICE when they have a known criminal alien in their custody?
ICE has access to booking logs and the jail's database why do they need to be called?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldglory
Who's denying someone to marry whom they want? As for gays, many Americans just object to a "traditional" marriage for them. A civil union will serve the same purpose.
If you aren't forced to go to the wedding just mind your own business. No, civil unions do not give same sex couples the same rights as marriage does. Unless a state law has laws conveying specific rights to a civil union they are not allowed the following:
Tax benefits: As a married couple, you can file joint tax returns with the state and the IRS.
Health care benefits: You may have the right to make medical decisions on behalf of your spouse, as well as have unlimited visitation privileges, if they are sick.
Estate planning benefits: When your spouse dies, you’ll inherit all of their assets, without incurring taxes.
If you are referring to abortion it isn't just the woman's body at stake here. No one should have the right to kill anyone born or unborn.
If you don't want your wife or daughter to have an abortion that's your personal issue. When it comes to other women, their right to have an abortion is protected by Roe V Wade, just like your precious 2A rights are guaranteed by Heller.
Originally Posted by Listener2307 You ain't gonna ever get one. No one cares about your "definition".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
Its not my definition, she brought it up lets hear what she thinks is a sanctuary city. I have yet to hear specifically where they are in violation of federal law.
If a city declares themselves to be a sanctuary city, they are. How's that? Happy?
There is nothing that illegals contribute to American society that is essential to our existence or our economy. Every job that is preformed by an illegal can be and would be performed by an American if it is worthwhile and essential.
If that were true then citizens would be lining up to pick crops, slaughter chickens, clean bathrooms and wash dishes in restaurants, but they aren't and they won't even if you kick out every single illegal immigrant in the US.
Sounds like a question that you should ask the officials of those cities who publicly declare themselves to be a sanctuary city.
Get them to tell you specifically what they will and won't do as far as cooperation with federal immigration agencies and laws and what their motivation behind that level of cooperation is.
There's a difference between a city that does not wish to spend the time and money to help enforce federal immigration laws and one that is purposely ignoring and or helping to prevent enforcement of those laws.
Each city has a slightly different policy relative to holding times for minor offenses, but the issue you point out in the last paragraph is the focus of the discussion. These cities are not ignoring assisting immigration officers, it is a question of resources and jails space.
Residents want police to devote their time to capturing violent felons rather than some illegal immigrant on that is hit with a minor traffic violation.
Sanctuary cities (or States) are in violation of the U.S. Constitution and established law. The States created the Constitution which established the Federal Government. They agreed to it's terms. Now they want to go "rogue" and "do their own thing?"
Correct! Like the 2A, this is NOT a state's rights issue. They all agreed to the Constitution, so they have to abide by it. The Feds should arrest these Mayors, and Police chiefs for not following the law. And cut off Fed funding!
Correct! Like the 2A, this is NOT a state's rights issue. They all agreed to the Constitution, so they have to abide by it. The Feds should arrest these Mayors, and Police chiefs for not following the law. And cut off Fed funding!
You can't arrest local officials for not enforcing federal law, I'm amazed that you didn't know that.
In the 1997 case, Printz v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government could not command state law enforcement authorities to conduct background checks on prospective handgun purchasers.
In the 1992 case, New York v. United States, the Court ruled that Congress couldn’t require states to enact specified waste disposal regulations.
In Prigg v. Pennsylvania (1842), Justice Joseph Story held that the federal government could not force states to implement or carry out the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793. He said that it was a federal law, and the federal government ultimately had to enforce it.
So, yes the decision as to whether or not to enforce federal law is a states rights issue.
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.
