Allowing municipal disobedience of this sort, in the form of sanctuary cities, is a double-edged sword. Sure, it may protect illegal immigrants who are simply good, decent people who want to find a better life in America. But it sets a very bad legal precedent - imagine if a city wants to suppress voters in a way that violates federal law, or otherwise flout federal law because it feels like it.
Sanctuary cities? When are we going to do something about sanctuary STATES that refuse to enforce federal drug laws? In Colorado, you can go in to a STORE and buy drugs! STOP THIS TRAVESTY OF JUSTICE.
I mean, seriously? Let federal cops enforce federal laws. That’s what my taxes are for, right?
Yes. Basically if you remember back a few years ago there was a case where Arizona got slapped down by the courts for trying to usurp the Federal governments role the regulator of immigration. Trump is trying to make it mandatory to do what Arizona got slapped down for. Cities are rightly saying, that its not their job.
I don’t think it’s right of them to refuse to enforce those, either.
However, AIUI - it’s a constitutionality debate, about the gun laws.
Because they’re not sheltering anyone. The description Blinky is providing is simply not accurate.
A so-called “Sanctuary city” is basically just any municipality that makes the policy decision not to check people’s immigration status before providing them with a municipal service. Immigration enforcement is not the job of a city government.
In truth, almost all cities are sanctuary cities. Very, very few towns have the time, resources or inclination to enforce immigration law. It isn’t their job, and it’s not something they want to waste their time and money on. “Not my jurisdiction” is a pretty standard answer to things like this. Cities only have so much dough and they aren’t generally friendly about the idea of doing the federal government’s job for them.
Some cities have made a public show of declaring themselves “sanctuary cities” either
- To appeal to the largely liberal voting base, or
- As an excuse to save money,
… but for the most part it’s a symbolic gesture that changes little or nothing.
My Democrat plan for Democrat sanctuary cities is to enact a Democrat income tax surcharge on non-Democrat billionaires to increase the Democrat marginal tax rate to Democrat 90% and take all the Democrat proceeds and give them to Democrat sanctuary cities to promote Democrat priorities such as Democrat green energy, Democrat public schools, and Democrat road construction projects.
Democrat.
Ah, I see. That’s helpful. Thanks.
Please explain what Jefferson Davis has to do with diverse, liberal, and economically advanced cities withholding funds and seceding from the insane Trump government that wants to occupy them.
Are you alerted every time I post so that you can somehow try to link me with the Confederacy?
Perhaps you are triggered by the word “secession”. Many abolitionists were not afflicted with this mental tic. I consider myself a modern abolitionist. Moderates in the era of slavery were some nasty individuals. They supported things like the Corwin amendment while the radical abolitionists were on the right side of history (hate this NPR phrase).
(post shortened)
It should be illegal at the federal, state, and local levels for employers to hire illegal aliens. Fine the employer an increasing amount for each, and every, illegal alien they hire.
There will be far fewer illegal aliens for sanctuary cities to harbor.
Along with RickJay’s answer, “These people” as some people call them, are our neighbors. “They” go to our churches, “their kids” play on our Little League teams. “They’re” as much a part of this city as I am. I’ve probably dealt with several in the last week and never gave it a second thought. To us, “they” are hard working, honest families trying to get through the hardships of life the same way we are. Legal or not, it’s fiction to think that they are not an integral part of our city.
Secondly, we question the intentions of those who are pushing this agenda. It’s not an intellectual debate where they sit around drinking tea whilst they ponder the societal and economical effects of immigration. It’s driven by fear and hatred of “others” and as someone whose immediate family includes Jews and Armenians, we’ve seen that before.
Finally, the best description I’ve ever heard of Republicans vs. Democrats is “Democrats worry that someone won’t get help they need. Republicans worry that someone will get help they don’t deserve.” If it costs us a little more in taxes to help these people, it won’t kill us.
Questions for Mr. Pinky:
- Which group is statistically more likely to commit violent (“dangerous”) crimes — citizens or illegal aliens?
- Omar Mateen, who killed 49 people in Orlando in June — where he was born? Had his green card expired?
- Other mass murderers — Aaron Alexis, Christopher Sean Harper-Mercer, Robert Lewis Dear, Dylann Storm Roof — had their visas expired? Were they hiding in sanctuary cities?
- Were the hijackers who destroyed buildings on 11 September 2001 in the country illegally? Did they come from countries covered by the Trump-Bannon Muslim ban?
I realize these may be difficult questions for you, Mr. Pinky, but do exert yourself. Post the answers here, if you solve them. People will take you more seriously if you appear to have a clue.
I’m paying a guy to come to my house today and remove some debris left over from cutting down two diseased trees. I have not personally met the gentleman yet, only a phone conversation. I must admit he sounded possibly Hispanic. So, in exchange for about 4 hours of manual labor, I’m paying him $120 cash. Is he a citizen? Don’t know. Is he here legally? No idea. And I’m not going to ask. So I guess, for today at least, I have a “Sanctuary Back Yard”.
I may even offer him some lemonade, since we are supposed to be a little warm today, at least for this time of year.
Well, that tears it. Now all the illegals are going to expect free lemonade.
Meanwhile, regarding this point by the OP:
[Quote=Blinkyandpinky]
Should the mayors in such cities be held liable and responsible for any and all crime committed by any illegal alien that the city has been illegally harboring?
[/Quote]
Following the, er, logic above, should the mayors of all cities not be held liable and responsible for all crimes, full stop?
Also, not demanding ID papers of random individuals going about their business does not equate to “harboring”.
Seriously? Not a sensible requirement? One that would save the tax payers money? One that would save the city/municipality money?
Not sensible… I can think of nothing as not sensible as NOT checking
And:
- To appeal and respond to their ethnic population, who, regardless of immigration status, are feeling more and more under scrutiny and unwelcome in the current political climate. This doesn’t change policy, but reassures constituents/community members that the local government is with them, and not against them.
How would this save taxpayers money? It’d cost them money.
Understand that by checking the citizenship status of every person every time they receive a city service, you just added years and years of labor to the city’s expense sheet. Not hours. YEARS. You also need the infrastructure, training, and resources to do it effectively. Every point of service with the city you now have to have the city worker check someone’;s immigration status. That time adds up, and unless they have the training and infrastructure to effectively check it it won’t work.
On top of that, you are massively inconveniencing the residents of the city; even if they’re ten generations American they now have to bring proof of citizenship to do everything with the city. Pay a parking ticket? Bring your passport… oh you don’t have a passport? Birth certificate? You have to bring proof of citizenship to sign your kid up for swimming lessons, get a dog license, or get a street parking permit. How you’re going to do this if the city offers these services online as well as in person I have no idea - that’s a fucking HUGE IT challenge you just put in front of the cash-starved city council.
Now every in person interaction takes at least an extra five minutes or so. Do you know how many interactions a medium sized city has with the public? A million? I think that’s a low guess. Congratulations, you just added the equivalent of FORTY YEARS of work to your city staff. You’re out way more than a million bucks just min labor, awesome job. Best of luck getting the online citizenship test to work; you will be lucky if it’s half-assed effective in less than two years at a cost of a million dollars. All the while your residents, 99% of whoim are legal residents, are going to be screaming at you about the inconvenience.
You want cops to be questioning every citizen they stop about immigration status? Congratulations, Mr. Mayor, your political career is doomed. For one thing, you just made the cops’ jobs far, far harder. Every stop they make is longer and more complex and, again, needs IT infrastructure you don’t presently have. However many cops you currently employ, you don’t have enough, because as anyone who has ever held a real job knows, by lengthening the time every interaction takes you’re increasing the workload beyond the current capacity. And that’s the best case scenario. What will probably end up happening is that due to racism, confusion, incompetence, or sheer bad luck, a cop will stop Hector Alberto Martinez, a citizen, and he’ll be confused with Hector Armando Martinez, an illegal alien, and he’ll file a perfectly justified civil rights suit agains thte city and you’ll be all over cable news as The Racist Mayor and your city lawyers will be telling you “We have no choice but to settle and you have to find $500,000 off the city budget.” All because you didn’t want to be a sanctuary city like pretty much every city in America. Well done!
At heart, this is absolutely the number one reason cities make this “Sanctuary City” declaration; they are trying to keep the feds or the state from downloading costs and problems on to them they simply cannot afford. You’re a mayor, you already got 99 problems, son, and immigration ain’t one, so why tick the number up to 100?
I agree, immigration enforcement is not the city’s responsibility, however, expenditures that affect city income IS the city’s responsibility.
If you are here legally, you have 1 of about 3 things.
ID, a SSN, or a green card. Checking any of those isn’t a YEARS long requirement.
I am not equating DWI with terrorism.
I am equating DWI with dangerous criminals brandishing a lethal weapon.
It is not uncommon for a person to be shot by the police, if a person is in public brandishing any sort of weapon. There have been numerous cases of such incidents.
Why should DWI be any different? And a car is certainly far more lethal than somebody carrying a small knife for example. Terrorists all the world, including in Europe, the USA and in Israel have increasingly been employing motor vehicles and trucks as weapons of terror.
I believe that it should be routine and police policy for officers to shoot and kill DWI drivers, as any DWI driver poses an immediate and lethal threat that should be eliminated as quickly as possible.
To not consider DWI a serious crime, like the mayor of New York believes, and to shield illegal alien DWI drivers from deportation is a direct threat against the citizens of this country and the countless victims and deaths caused by DWI criminals are a reminder of that.