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.
This is not enough, Trump needs to order the AG to start prosecuting city councils, Governors, townships, police chiefs under 8 U.S. Code § 1324.
Sanctuary policies are already felonies that can result in fines and imprisonment for those assisting illegal aliens. As Chief-Executive-Officer, demands the arrest and prosecution of those in responsible for sanctuary cities, driver's licenses for illegals, in state-tuition for illegals etc.
This is why I yawn at this stuff, the law is clear, we always had the means to punish sanctuary cities. However, as usual, the Republicans lacked the testicular fortitude to actually do anything but suckle at the teat of their corporate masters, the chamber of commerce, and the business roundtable.
Re: 8 U.S. Code § 1324, which reads, in part, as follows:
(A) Any person who...
...(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)
(B) A person who violates subparagraph (A) shall, for each alien in respect to whom such a violation occurs
(i) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i) or (v)(I) or in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(ii), (iii), or (iv) in which the offense was done for the purpose of commercial advantage or private financial gain, be fined under title 18, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both;
(ii) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(ii), (iii), (iv), or (v)(II), be fined under title 18, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both;
(iii) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i), (ii), (iii), (iv), or (v) during and in relation to which the person causes serious bodily injury (as defined in section 1365 of title 18) to, or places in jeopardy the life of, any person, be fined under title 18, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both; and
(iv) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i), (ii), (iii), (iv), or (v) resulting in the death of any person, be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined under title 18, or both.
Glad Trump is keeping his promises. THAT alone got to be a valid reason for a second term.
Agreed with above poster saying we need to go one step further and prosecute these City Counsel Members/Mayors/Governors/Sheriff that created these laws and go against protecting the local Citizens.
Would love to see Mayor Adler and Sheriff Hernandez, here in Austin, put in jail for their traitorous policies to protect these Illegals.
So now we have a SCOTUS-approved policy that allows the US President to selectively target and financially damage cities he does not like. This is no longer functioning at the federal level; it's down to specific cities. He can pick and choose which city he attacks. What is to stop him from applying this for leverage on other policies? Or just targeting cities that didn't vote for him? The guy was already impeached for abuse of power.
Wrong. He can’t cutoff findings to cities that are not sanctuary cities. No different than states not receiving federal transportation funds if certain requirements are not met.
I agree that there should be no monetary support for states/cities that flout federal law.
What I'm suggesting then is that it should be applied equally across all Sanctuary cities and states, not picking and choosing individual targets. There's too much opportunity for abuse. I know you guys will positively freak out when, say, Pres. Bernie Sanders cuts off Federal funding to Omaha, Nebraska because it didn't support his socialized medicine program or because it passed an anti-immigrant law.
To clarify: I'm opposed to my state's Sanctuary law. I just don't trust DJT.
So now we have a SCOTUS-approved policy that allows the US President to selectively target and financially damage cities he does not like. This is no longer functioning at the federal level; it's down to specific cities. He can pick and choose which city he attacks. What is to stop him from applying this for leverage on other policies? Or just targeting cities that didn't vote for him? The guy was already impeached for abuse of power.
Yes, that's correct. Doesn't it just suck to be an illegal alien loving liberal these days?
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.
