Democrats Defying Trump on Sanctuary Cities Is a ‘Mistaken Bet’

Boycott these sanctacry cities hit them where it hurts

This is America. No defiance of an order is involved. A president does not have the authority to command the elected mayor of a city.

“Sanctuary cities were a scandal before Trump. It’s in defiance of federal authority. Federal authority is legitimate. The people who did this in the past were the racists in the south who defied federal authority on civil rights, so now it’s in the name of something that appears to be humanitarian.

During the civil rights movement, the federal government was protecting the constitutional rights of individual citizens from discriminatory state laws. The states had no legal authority to deprive citizens of their constitutionally guaranteed rights based on race.

In the case of sanctuary cities, the federal government has no authority to compel a city government to comply with a president’s orders. If Trump wants to send out law enforcement personnel who are properly under his presidential authority to arrest and deport people, he can do that.

No matter where an illegal immigrant is, they are still illegally here.

So send out your deportation force and arrest them. Don’t expect the police forces of sanctuary cities to do it for you. They’re more concerned with catching real criminals. If one turns out to be an undocumented alien, you can probably expect cooperation on that one—since they were already doing that to begin with.

Somebody mentioned boycotts. An unpopular president with 500 businesses should probably be careful about using that word. People he pisses off might get ideas. The Trump brand could be made about as popular as leprosy. People have power.

@Greg: It doesn’t matter how you want to define it, Greg, the purpose of a police officer is to enforce the laws of the country, state, county, city and local municipalities. They don’t have the option of choosing which laws they enforce, if it’s a violation of a law, they are sworn to uphold all laws. Sounds as if you think a city can create a ‘tax dodger’ zone or a ‘heroin’ user zone. Next you’ll be wanting a ‘rapist sanctuary’. Any law officer that does not enforce the laws he’s sworn to enforce should be fired. Here is the oath of office that a local police officer in the state of Utah swears to ” “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support, obey and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this State, and that I will discharge the duties of my office with fidelity.”
Do you see anything there that allows him, or requires him, to not enforce immigration laws?

They don’t have the option of choosing which laws they enforce, if it’s a violation of a law, they are sworn to uphold all laws.

In point of fact, the focus of local police department manpower is most often directed by municipal government to best deal with the problems it deems to represent the most serious threats to local civil order and public safety. All laws must be enforced with equal effort might be fine in theory, but in reality that simply isn’t how things work.

That’s why federal drug laws regarding marijuana are not being diligently enforced by local police departments in states that have legalized medical marijuana. You can run around waving your arms in the air and ranting about marijuana being a Schedule I drug the same as heroin if you wish. A number of states have formally recognized such scheduling as completely nuts, and are not going to waste local time and money enforcing a law that their own voters and legislatures have formally rejected.

Sanctuary cities don’t view every undocumented alien as a likely drug pusher, rapist, thief, or murderer—because they’re not. Any that truly are can be dealt with accordingly. Any that truly are can be dealt with both as criminals and persons who have no business being here. That’s been the Obama administration’s approach. Limited resources have been acknowledged, and the people they are applied to have been prioritized. An undocumented college student with no criminal record isn’t treated the same way as an undocumented repeat offender, and shouldn’t be.

@Greg: You don’t get it. These sanctuary cities let criminals go free solely because they are illegal immigrants. If ICE asks them to hold someone ALREADY IN CUSTODY so they can be picked up, the sanctuary cities release them; then citizens die.

Now I see why you so adamantly supported a criminal candidate; ideology IS law.

@Bill- Deplorable Me:

Gee, has the left forgotten that the state of Arizona wanted to assist in the enforcement of immigration law? It went all the way to the Supreme Court where the state of Arizona was told immigration law was under Federal Authority. The left uses the Constitution when it benefits them and forgets it when it opposes them.

@July 4th American, #10:

Federal Law in the case of immigration, Trumps state and local law. Civics much there ol greg….

That’s not the issue. The issue is whether or not state, county, and municipal police are legally bound to enforce laws that are strictly federal. No, they are not so required. In fact, there has been debate about whether this is even permissible.

Congress can delegate the authority to enforce federal law to local law enforcement personnel not under federal jurisdiction, but they cannot compel that they do so by legal requirement. Local law enforcement is concerned with state, county, and municipal law. In the course of their official duties they are legally bound to enforce only those laws, and are commanded only by state, county, and municipal authorities.

This isn’t a question of somebody using the Constitution. It’s how the the people that created the Constitution purposefully set things up. They didn’t want to create a single, supreme source of authority over all things in the nation’s capital. That hasn’t changed just because Donald Trump is being elevated from reality TV host to Commander in Chief.

@July 4th American:

States are and have always been bound to recognize federal law. Because you have been mis educated, you fail to understand that law enforcement at a state and local level is duty bound to apprehend a criminal known to have violated any federal law.

There’s a single word that describes your position on this point of Constitutional law: Wrong.

State, local, and municipal law enforcement personnel may be delegated the authority to enforce federal laws by a president or Congress, including immigration law, but they are under absolutely no legal compulsion to do so. In their official capacities as law enforcement personnel, they do not operate under federal authority. They are not legally bound to enforce a law that exists in federal statute but does not exist on the state level. They are not instruments of Congress, or subject to presidential commands. That’s not their job. That’s not the Constitution.

Why do you imagine local authorities aren’t busily closing down medical marijuana dispensaries or arresting cancer patients who are relying on prescribed cannabis products for control of pain and nausea? The DEA claims it’s a Schedule 1 drug, with high potential for addiction and absolutely no legitimate uses in medicine. Federal law classifies it as being essentially the same as heroin. More states have now rejected this absurd view than accept it, and have changed their state laws to reflect that conclusion.

State and local law enforcement officers don’t close them down because they enforce state law, not federal law. They’ve got more useful things to do with their time.

I don’t really see how it does. It isn’t the city, its government, its churches, or its lawful residents who are in violation of federal immigration laws. Federal authorities can still enforce federal immigration laws there. They just can’t compel the city or its officials or residents to do so for them.

Laws. Please obey them as you find them convenient.

Thank you,

Liberals

@Spurwing Plover: pull their federal funding; even better.

@Greg: Greg, most or all police officers swear to an oath to uphold the laws of the constitution, state, county and local. It doesn’t provide for them to opt out of laws that they don’t like.

@Bill… Deplorable Me, #24:

I guess then you’d better start arresting and locking up Catholic priests and members of the Catholic Church, since they’re the originators of and a key component in the sanctuary movement in virtually every city where it’s an issue.

The following, by the way, would be the part having a bearing on the discussion about the legal obligations of state, county, and municipal law enforcement officers:

(c) Authority to arrest
No officer or person shall have authority to make any arrests for a violation of any provision of this section except officers and employees of the Service designated by the Attorney General, either individually or as a member of a class, and all other officers whose duty it is to enforce criminal laws.

State, county, and municipal law enforcement officers have no legal duty to enforce this federal statute, and the Attorney General has no Constitutional authority to order them to do so.

I suppose Trump can reconfigure ICE along the guidelines of the gestapo, conduct raids of kindergartens and Catholic day care facilities, confiscate their property without due process, and send teachers and day care workers off to prison for concealing the status of the undocumented children in their care. Have at it. See what happens.

@Greg:

I guess then you’d better start arresting and locking up Catholic priests and members of the Catholic Church, since they’re the originators of and a key component in the sanctuary movement in virtually every city where it’s an issue.

ANYONE that breaks the law should be held responsible. This includes former Secretaries of State that abuses her office or priests. Anyone.

It is against the law to enter this country illegally. It is against the law to harbor illegal immigrants. I guess it even has to be pointed out, to a liberal, that it is against the law for an illegal immigrant to commit felonies. It is against the law for authorities in sanctuary cities to release criminals because they are illegal immigrants and ICE has notified the city that they want to come and pick them up.

No one is asking city cops to act as immigration officials, but they MUST cooperate with the law. I suppose if a city or state wishes to ignore background checks on gun purchases, that’s OK? No, because FEDERAL LAW has to be obeyed.

I suppose Trump can reconfigure ICE along the guidelines of the gestapo, conduct raids of kindergartens and Catholic day care facilities, confiscate their property without due process, and send teachers and day care workers off to prison for concealing the status of the undocumented children in their care. Have at it. See what happens.

Ah. You mean like Clinton did with Elian Gonzalez. No, there are other ways to get people to comply with the laws. The primary one is money. These liberal enclaves NEED money because they waste so much of it on stupid things like paying illegal immigrants to be here illegally. We’ll see how firmly they stand by their “principles” when the money begins to dry up and those who HAVE he right to vote begin losing THEIR services.

8 U.S. Code § 1324 – Bringing in and harboring certain aliens

(a) Criminal penalties
(1)
(A) Any person who—
(i) knowing that a person is an alien, brings 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;
(ii) 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;
(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.
(C) It is not a violation of clauses [1] (ii) or (iii) of subparagraph (A), or of clause (iv) of subparagraph (A) except where a person encourages or induces an alien to come to or enter the United States, for a religious denomination having a bona fide nonprofit, religious organization in the United States, or the agents or officers of such denomination or organization, to encourage, invite, call, allow, or enable an alien who is present in the United States to perform the vocation of a minister or missionary for the denomination or organization in the United States as a volunteer who is not compensated as an employee, notwithstanding the provision of room, board, travel, medical assistance, and other basic living expenses, provided the minister or missionary has been a member of the denomination for at least one year.
(2) Any person who, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has not received prior official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, brings 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 shall, for each alien in respect to whom a violation of this paragraph occurs—
(A) be fined in accordance with title 18 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; or
(B) in the case of—
(i) an offense committed with the intent or with reason to believe that the alien unlawfully brought into the United States will commit an offense against the United States or any State punishable by imprisonment for more than 1 year,
(ii) an offense done for the purpose of commercial advantage or private financial gain, or
(iii) an offense in which the alien is not upon arrival immediately brought and presented to an appropriate immigration officer at a designated port of entry,
be fined under title 18 and shall be imprisoned, in the case of a first or second violation of subparagraph (B)(iii), not more than 10 years, in the case of a first or second violation of subparagraph (B)(i) or (B)(ii), not less than 3 nor more than 10 years, and for any other violation, not less than 5 nor more than 15 years.
(3)
(A) Any person who, during any 12-month period, knowingly hires for employment at least 10 individuals with actual knowledge that the individuals are aliens described in subparagraph (B) shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both.
(B) An alien described in this subparagraph is an alien who—
(i) is an unauthorized alien (as defined in section 1324a(h)(3) of this title), and
(ii) has been brought into the United States in violation of this subsection.
(4) In the case of a person who has brought aliens into the United States in violation of this subsection, the sentence otherwise provided for may be increased by up to 10 years if—
(A) the offense was part of an ongoing commercial organization or enterprise;
(B) aliens were transported in groups of 10 or more; and
(C)
(i) aliens were transported in a manner that endangered their lives; or
(ii) the aliens presented a life-threatening health risk to people in the United States.
(b) Seizure and forfeiture
(1) In general

Any conveyance, including any vessel, vehicle, or aircraft, that has been or is being used in the commission of a violation of subsection (a), the gross proceeds of such violation, and any property traceable to such conveyance or proceeds, shall be seized and subject to forfeiture.
(2) Applicable procedures

Seizures and forfeitures under this subsection shall be governed by the provisions of chapter 46 of title 18 relating to civil forfeitures, including section 981(d) of such title, except that such duties as are imposed upon the Secretary of the Treasury under the customs laws described in that section shall be performed by such officers, agents, and other persons as may be designated for that purpose by the Attorney General.
(3) Prima facie evidence in determinations of violationsIn determining whether a violation of subsection (a) has occurred, any of the following shall be prima facie evidence that an alien involved in the alleged violation had not received prior official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States or that such alien had come to, entered, or remained in the United States in violation of law:
(A) Records of any judicial or administrative proceeding in which that alien’s status was an issue and in which it was determined that the alien had not received prior official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States or that such alien had come to, entered, or remained in the United States in violation of law.
(B) Official records of the Service or of the Department of State showing that the alien had not received prior official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States or that such alien had come to, entered, or remained in the United States in violation of law.
(C) Testimony, by an immigration officer having personal knowledge of the facts concerning that alien’s status, that the alien had not received prior official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States or that such alien had come to, entered, or remained in the United States in violation of law.
(c) Authority to arrest

No officer or person shall have authority to make any arrests for a violation of any provision of this section except officers and employees of the Service designated by the Attorney General, either individually or as a member of a class, and all other officers whose duty it is to enforce criminal laws.
(d) Admissibility of videotaped witness testimony

Notwithstanding any provision of the Federal Rules of Evidence, the videotaped (or otherwise audiovisually preserved) deposition of a witness to a violation of subsection (a) who has been deported or otherwise expelled from the United States, or is otherwise unable to testify, may be admitted into evidence in an action brought for that violation if the witness was available for cross examination and the deposition otherwise complies with the Federal Rules of Evidence.
(e) Outreach program

The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of State, as appropriate, shall develop and implement an outreach program to educate the public in the United States and abroad about the penalties for bringing in and harboring aliens in violation of this section.

@Greg:

State, county, and municipal law enforcement officers have no legal duty to enforce this federal statute, and the Attorney General has no Constitutional authority to order them to do so.

Very interesting. So lets say there are 3 policemen in a bank when it is robbed. two local officers and an FBI agent. one local officer wants to apprehend the robbers, one local officer does not and the FBI guy decides he should since he is a Federal agent, but is he ‘obligated’ to do so? Can his boss order him to do so? Suppose the bank robber reveals that he is an illegal alien and all the police officers decide they can’t arrest him because he is not under their jurisdiction? Can the local officer arrest the guy regardless of what the other two officers want to do?. Can the two local policemen arrest the bank robber under any circumstances since it is a federal crime and not a local crime? Suppose one local officer arrested the robber, could he be sued by the robber for interfering with his civil rights?
I think if you consider the bedlam that would ensue if each policeman in the country decided which laws are to be enforced and when to enforce them. Should the FBI guy arrest the local policeman if the local policeman interferes with the right of the bank robber to rob the bank? Suppose the bank robber had parked illegally outside, should the right of the local policeman to arrest the guy take precedent over the FBI for him robbing the bank.
Clearly, I think the answer is that all police officers have a duty to enforce laws, and the ability to use common sense in doing so.

@Greg: #22

There’s no legal requirement that requires local authorities to enforce federal statutes that don’t also exist as state laws. That’s not their job. They’re ignoring nothing when they refrain from doing so. You wouldn’t expect the local or state police to arrest people for federal income tax violations

It appears greg, you are completely wrong…….

In 1996, the 104th U.S. Congress passed Pub. L. 104-208, also known as the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA ). The IIRIRA requires local governments to cooperate with Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Agency. Despite the IIRIRA, hundreds of urban, suburban, and rural communities have ignored the law and adopted so-called “sanctuary policies.”

@Randy: As Ronald Reagan is quoted: It’s not that Greg is ignorant, it’s just that he knows so many things that aren’t true.
But that seems to fit most Dims these days.

The FEDs only need to arrest a few Chiefs of police for these cities or better yet, a mayor or two to reverse this trend. Let them stay in jail for several days and introduce them to the perb walk.
It is like those western when a lynch mob tries to free a suspect from jail and hang him. The sheriff defending the suspect against 2 or more people does not threaten the whole mob. He threatens the leaders with a shotgun blast. When the leaders back down, the mob dissipates.