A real constitutional crisis on the horizon? (immigration, sanctuary cities, and DHS)

Sigh. You know who’s really bad at seeing bigotry? Bigots. It’s curious how the loudest demands for “rule of law” are attached to laws that predominantly target brown immigrants.

Immigration law is not airtight. If anything it is a means of calibrating the inevitable flow of illegal immigration. Illegal immigrants work in our fields and contribute to our communities. The recent intensification of ICE raids is unnecessary, cruel, rooted in bigotry, and damaging to our country.

I agree. Publicly resisting unjust, harmful, bullshit policies is the most fantastic way to get arrested.

Hey, as long as they know what they’re getting themselves into, I say have a grand old time doing it. I’ll watch the LiveLeak videos of the fun later.

I suggest then that we give California what they want. All immigration is legal: to california only.

Sorry, still not seeing it. Could you please clarify the criminal penalties someone might face under AB 450?

I agree. That provision strikes me as political pandering, not serious legislating.

It’s a civil violation.

Politicians know what a chilling effect is. That’s the actual intention, as well as political pandering.

Such attempts at intimidating the populace should not go unpunished. California’s actions are making me sympathize a lot more with the Trump administration’s position. There are lots of legal ways to stick it to California. Frequent raids that net large numbers of illegals is one of them, although I still say if you want to actually hurt California, just do what they want and stop enforcing the law. And make a point of announcing that federal agents won’t set foot in California to enforce immigration law. So hey, China? Got 10 million you can send us?

I disagree with a general punishment targeting California as a result of this law. I don’t suggest that Texas have its military bases taken away because of its series of unconstitutional laws restricting abortion.

The way adults handle disputes like this is for someone to take the state to court and have the law struck down. Which in this case, shouldn’t seem all that difficult.

The AG says he intends to bring the court to people, so maybe they’ll get the chance sooner rather than later.

I don’t agree. If the police want to search my apartment, they need to get the court to give them a warrant. They can’t go to my landlord and ask him to let them in when I’m not home. They can’t go to my friend that has a key and ask her for it. And my landlord and my friend are private citizens. But they don’t get to cooperate with law enforcement if it violates my constitutional right to freedom from unwarranted search and seizure.

And I believe this freedom from search and seizure is important. Otherwise, the police could act based on political and personal motivations rather than following the rule of law. The warrant system provides a check on this.

The American justice system prioritizes protecting the innocent over punishing the guilty. It’s why we use a standard of reasonable doubt rather than preponderance of evidence in criminal cases. It’s why judges throw out cases if the laws regarding arrest and interrogation procedures weren’t followed.

And sometimes guilty people get away with. And sometimes they go on to commit other crimes. And sometimes those crimes hurt other people. And that’s unfortunate. But it’s an indication that the system is working the way it’s supposed to, not that it’s broken.

And I find it amusing that conservatives believe in the “rule of law”, unless it regards a decision issued by a federal judge that they disagree with.

The current situation in California is that illegal immigration is mostly not punished. Why do you think codifying that would make it worse?

All I’m seeing is Trump-style bogeyman logic. There is no possibility that China would send any immigrants, as that’s not how things work, and there are not millions of potential immigrants that are waiting in the wings, ready to strike.

Sure, if there were that many people coming in, it would be a problem, because the state couldn’t cope. But more immigrants in general? California is a pretty wealthy state, and can absorb them until they can contribute to the economy, making up for the investment. There’s a reason why the richest states tend to be the most liberal.

If letting California have more immigrants would be a bad thing, then stepped up enforcement wouldn’t be necessary. It’s only there because they don’t want people to see just how much it doesn’t matter. The current administration has to have its bogeyman. We can’t tell the truth that jobs are being lost to automation. No, we have to blame the immigrants.

None of this is about loyalty to country or state. It’s just not letting fearmongering, nationalist nonsense cause harm to real human beings. It’s just the left showing their characteristic compassion, and fighting against an administration fundamentally opposed to the concept.

Trump is evil. This is one of the ways in which he is evil. So the good guys are fighting back.

I don’t understand what this means…

You said adults should “take the state to court”, but they don’t even have to initiate it. The AG says that he’s going to lead the state in taking the adults to court.

Hmmm…the law says nothing about skin color. Wonder why you found it necessary to play the color card here.

Sigh. You know who’s really bad at seeing common sense? Liberals.

Our country is being flooded with illegal aliens. And we need to round them up, run them out and if we have to, build the damn wall to keep them out.

Do you understand the difference between “you do not have to do X” and “you are not allowed to do X”? The latter is what California has codified.

I read recently that California has ~12% of the nation’s population and 1/3 of the nation’s welfare recipients.

So if somebody in California is detained by ICE, and an immigration judge is brought in to determine what should happen to that person, I don’t see how the state law gets challenged in US vs Jones.

DOJ should sue California directly. And I bet you on this issue, the US would win.

ETA: just to be clear, when I used the term adults, I wasn’t talking about undocumented aliens. I was talking about how grown up people who are mature and have a sense of reason and propriety deal with controversial issues.

One of the long-standing exceptions to the warrant requirement is consent. California now wants to punish people who grant consent. We’re not talking about landlords or friends. If a business owner wants to grant consent for an ICE agent to enter the non-public areas of his business, California wants to punish that business owner.

As a general rule, I think it’s dumb to grant consent to law enforcement agents, but it by itself shouldn’t be an act we punish people for.

I certainly wouldn’t bet against you. IANAL, and I already said I thought California was nucking futs. I would hope a court would provide some corrective guidance here.

IIRC this was decided in Court when Arizona qua a sovereign state wanted to enforce Federal immigration laws and were told “No you can’t.”