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)
View Poll Results: What say you?
Treason 45 31.69%
Obstruction 71 50.00%
Acceptable 25 17.61%
Not sure 1 0.70%
Voters: 142. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-12-2019, 10:22 AM
 
Location: Minneapolis, MN
10,244 posts, read 16,381,304 times
Reputation: 5309

Advertisements

I’m curious to know the rationale from those who would find this acceptable practice? Or would they compare it to states that legalized marijuana which are in effect ignoring federal law? In the marijuana case I agree with the states but that is mainly because I am so adamantly against the ridiculous classification cannabis has as a Schedule 1 controlled substance. I’m not sure I agree with willfully being uncooperative with the Federal govt’s attempt to uphold immigration law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-12-2019, 10:32 AM
 
59,138 posts, read 27,349,464 times
Reputation: 14291
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJJersey View Post
This is going on in liberal areas and in NJ. Our AG told county sheriffs and local law enforcement not to work with ICE. Is this treason? Obstruction of justice? Or is it acceptable?
Don't know about treason but, CERTAINLY breaking existing treatment of illegals laws.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2019, 10:37 AM
 
59,138 posts, read 27,349,464 times
Reputation: 14291
Quote:
Originally Posted by notnamed View Post
It’s following the law.

Immigration enforcement is the job of the feds. Local authorities are not given budget nor power to deal with it.

It becomes an issue only when they start actively warning them of ICE raids and such.
"It becomes an issue only when they start actively warning them of ICE raids and such


"
Title 8, U.S.C. § 1324(a) defines several distinct offenses related to aliens. Subsection 1324(a)(1)(i)-(v) prohibits alien smuggling, domestic transportation of unauthorized aliens, concealing or harboring unauthorized aliens, encouraging or inducing unauthorized aliens to enter the United States, and engaging in a conspiracy or aiding and abetting any of the preceding acts. Subsection 1324(a)(2) prohibits bringing or attempting to bring unauthorized aliens to the United States in any manner whatsoever, even at a designated port of entry. Subsection 1324(a)(3).
Alien Smuggling -- Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(i) makes it an offense for any person who -- knowing that a person is an alien, to bring 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.
Domestic Transporting -- Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii) makes it an offense for any person who -- 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.
Harboring -- Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(iii) makes it an offense for any person who -- 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.
Encouraging/Inducing -- Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv) makes it an offense for any person who -- 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.
Conspiracy/Aiding or Abetting -- Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(v) expressly makes it an offense to engage in a conspiracy to commit or aid or abet the commission of the foregoing offenses.
Bringing Aliens to the United States -- Subsection 1324(a)(2) makes it an offense for any person who -- knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has not received prior authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, to bring to or attempts to bring to the United States in any manner whatsoever, such alien, regardless of any official action which may later be taken with respect to such alien.
The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA), enacted on September 30, 1996, added a new 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(3)(A) which makes it an offense for any person, during any 12-month period, to knowingly hire at least 10 individuals with actual knowledge that these individuals are unauthorized aliens. See this Manual at 1908 (unlawful employment of aliens).
Unit of Prosecution -- With regard to offenses defined in subsections 1324(a)(1)(A)(i)-(v), (alien smuggling, domestic transporting, harboring, encouraging/inducing, or conspiracy/aiding or abetting) each alien with respect to whom a violation occurs constitutes a unit of prosecution. Prior to enactment of the IIRIRA, the unit of prosecution for violations of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(2) was each transaction, regardless of the number of aliens involved. However, the unit of prosecution is now based on each alien in respect to whom a violation occurs.
Knowledge -- Prosecutions for alien smuggling, 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(i) require proof that defendant knew that the person brought to the United States was an alien. With regard to the other violations in 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a), proof of knowledge or reckless disregard of alienage is sufficient.
Penalties -- The basic statutory maximum penalty for violating 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(i) and (v)(I) (alien smuggling and conspiracy) is a fine under title 18, imprisonment for not more than 10 years, or both. With regard to violations of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(ii)-(iv) and (v)(ii), domestic transportation, harboring, encouraging/inducing, or aiding/abetting, the basic statutory maximum term of imprisonment is 5 years, unless the offense was committed for commercial advantage or private financial gain, in which case the maximum term of imprisonment is 10 years. In addition, significant enhanced penalties are provided for in violations of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1) involving serious bodily injury or placing life in jeopardy. Moreover, if the violation results in the death of any person, the defendant may be punished by death or by imprisonment for any term of years. The basic penalty for a violation of subsection 1324(a)(2) is a fine under title 18, imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(2)(A). Enhanced penalties are provided for violations involving bringing in criminal aliens, 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(2)(B)(i), offenses done for commercial advantage or private financial gain, 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(2)(B)(ii), and violations where the alien is not presented to an immigration officer immediately upon arrival, 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(2)(B)(iii). A mandatory minimum three year term of imprisonment applies to first or second violations of § 1324(a)(2)(B)(i) or (B)(ii). Further enhanced punishment is provided for third or subsequent offenses.
COMMENT: Further discussion of offenses defined in 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a) is set forth in Chapter 3 of Immigration Law, published as part of the Office of Legal Education's Litigation Series, and as part of the USABook computer library.
[cited in JM 9-73.100]


https://www.justice.gov/jm/criminal-...1324a-offenses
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2019, 10:37 AM
 
17,311 posts, read 12,267,497 times
Reputation: 17263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
Don't know about treason but, CERTAINLY breaking existing treatment of illegals laws.
No it's certainly not. It's a 10th amendment issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2019, 10:42 AM
 
24,003 posts, read 15,100,850 times
Reputation: 12965
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo58 View Post
As of now 50% of the respondents to this poll don't know the definition of treason:

"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason" (US Code Title 18)

They are not levying war, and immigrants wouldn't exactly be classified as enemies, so the crime is not treason. Obstruction, perhaps.
Lots of ignorance sharing goes on here.

Like as been pointed out, it is the job of the federal government to protect the borders. If they can't even do that, how can we expect them to know of secret plans to invade or attack us? Looks to me like a lot of ineptness has been happening for 75 years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2019, 12:44 PM
 
6,835 posts, read 2,404,147 times
Reputation: 2727
Is it committing treason? Hard to say! Are we talking about them committing treason according to the letter of the Constitution or the spirit of the Constitution or treason from a de facto standpoint?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2019, 12:52 PM
 
4,481 posts, read 2,288,534 times
Reputation: 4092
They are not keeping their oath to their constituents.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2019, 12:58 PM
 
4,481 posts, read 2,288,534 times
Reputation: 4092
Quote:
Originally Posted by notnamed View Post
What a Sanctuary city/state does is simply not investigate whether they are citizens to begin with. Which is not their job. Nor can the feds compel them to. 10th amendment.
It actually blocks local LE from referring potential law breakers to ICE so they can investigate. It would be like if police came across someone scamming the IRS and blocking them from informing them. Why would anyone block local LE from working FBI, DEA, ATF, etc. Asinine.

If a police officer is investigating someone and they suspect they are illegal alien, they should be able to contact ICE so they can investigate. Sanctuary cities won't them. They aren't doing their job. It would and should be expected with any other fed agency.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2019, 01:46 PM
 
4,921 posts, read 7,694,341 times
Reputation: 5482
I find it humorous that this poll labels some politicians as traitors for refusing to help ICE and yet praises the antics of Comrade Trump who has placed the word of Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong Un over that of the US intelligence agencies. Comrade Trump, a draft dodger, a coward, who did nothing when N. Korea return Otto Warmbier to the US deaf and blind after being tortured. Comrade Trump refused to accept the word of US intelligence on the murder and mutilation of Jamal Khashoggi instead believing the Saudi's. Comrade Trump openly invited Russia to hack HRC emails and interfere in US elections.

I am not surprised to read a ton of misinformation here at CD. Many here have been manipulated into falsely believing that immigrants are the sole cause of joblessness, crime, etc. The people in charge want us to believe this fallacy as a decoy while they steal everything that isn't nailed down. Check out the following news article if you want the truth:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.957236f00f57
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2019, 01:48 PM
 
Location: NJ
23,567 posts, read 17,245,407 times
Reputation: 17615
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJJersey View Post
This is going on in liberal areas and in NJ. Our AG told county sheriffs and local law enforcement not to work with ICE. Is this treason? Obstruction of justice? Or is it acceptable?
As a voter, I call obstruction.


Who knows what the legal interpretation is.


My vote counts.
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 07:51 AM.

© 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