Chitchat [Liberal idiots] California aims to become a sanctuary state

Thick Face Black Heart

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Messages
12,289
Points
113
Democratic lawmakers in California are moving swiftly to pass a package of legislation that would restrict state and local law enforcement, including school police and security departments, from using their own resources to aid federal authorities in immigration enforcement.

The brewing legal battle between the state and Republican President Donald Trump, who Wednesday took sweeping actions designed to construct a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border and withhold federal funding to localities that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration authorities, could test the limits of California’s power amid questions over billions of dollars in funding.

The legislative package is moving four years after passage of the California “Trust Act,” which forbid state and local agencies from holding undocumented immigrants at the request of federal authorities. Immigration advocates say it would provide added cover to some local governments by standardizing often conflicting municipal policies and transforming California into a de facto “sanctuary state.”

“The state is saying, ‘I don’t want to be complicit with federal enforcement authority. We are doing our job. Let us do our job and look after state matters,’” said Grisel Ruiz, staff attorney at the Immigrant Legal Resource Center.

There are up to 2.6 million undocumented immigrants in California, according to Center for Migration Studies estimations from 2014. The three largest countries of origin are Mexico, El Salvador and Guatemala.

Along with restricting local action on immigration enforcement, Senate Bill 54, by Democratic Senate leader Kevin de León, would require schools, hospitals and courthouses around the state to adopt similar policies. It also would require state agencies to update their confidentiality policies so information on individuals’ immigration status is not shared for enforcement purposes.

Republicans criticized the approaches by majority Democrats as needlessly confrontational and ultimately unhelpful to the state’s interests under a Trump administration. Assemblyman James Gallagher, R-Yuba City, said the federal government’s focus on “criminal illegal aliens” is “just common sense.”

“To fight these policies and put our federal funding at risk, that’s dangerous,” he said.

His colleague, Assemblyman Travis Allen, R-Huntington Beach, is carrying legislation to withhold state funds to sanctuary cities and prevent state money from being used to defend illegal immigrants considered to be criminals.

Other critics focused on the tone of the approach by the state’s Democratic leaders.

“This kind of legislation and rhetoric from sanctuary cities and politicians in Sacramento creates the kind of environment wherein you are going to see clashes between immigration law enforcement and the advocates,” said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies.

De León, of Los Angeles, said Wednesday that he was collaborating with former U.S Attorney General Eric Holder and state Attorney General Xavier Becerra to examine ways to oppose Trump’s orders.

“It’s not the job of our local and county and state law enforcement to turn the cogs of President Trump’s deportation machine,” de León said. “He cannot force us and we will not hesitate to fight him in Congress and settle the matter in court.”

Other leaders, from Gov. Jerry Brown to mayors, indicated they would fight.

Brown pledged in his State of the State address this week to defend everybody who has come to the state “for a better life and has contributed to the well-being of our state.”

“I recognize that under the Constitution, federal law is supreme and that Washington determines immigration policy,” Brown said. “But as a state we can and have had a role to play. California has enacted several protective measures for the undocumented: the Trust Act, lawful driver’s licenses, basic employment rights and nondiscriminatory access to higher education.

“We may be called upon to defend those laws and defend them we will.”

In Los Angeles, Mayor Eric Garcetti, citing the 10th Amendment, said he doubted the federal government could cease funding to his city, while Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg added that he would “join, if not lead, any effort to fight (the sanctuary city threat) with litigation.”

San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee, delivering his annual State of the City address Thursday, declared that “we are a sanctuary city now, tomorrow, forever.”

“If and when the federal cuts will come,” Lee said, “We’ll be united behind our promises and our values.”

U.S. Supreme Court decisions appear to favor the state’s resistance, said Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the UC Irvine School of Law. The court has ruled that Congress cannot force state and local governments to enforce federal laws, he said, and it can’t put strings on federal grants that are “unduly coercive.”

“I think it would be challenged in courts and I think (their attempt) would be struck down by the courts,” he said.

Other legislation could throw a wrench into some deportation efforts and assist undocumented immigrants.

Sen. Ricardo Lara, D-Bell Gardens, is proposing Senate Bill 31 to prevent the creation of Muslim registries by banning state and local officials from giving the federal government information on a person’s religious affiliation when it’s sought to compile a database for law enforcement or immigration purposes. It also contains previsions similar to those in de León’s legislation.

Sen. Ben Hueso, D-San Diego, is carrying Senate Bill 6 to – among other things – enlist the state in legal assistance to those facing deportation.

Apolonio Morales, political director at the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles, said state resources should not be used to – in his words – destroy the trust between local law enforcement and the community. He pointed to the potential for lost tax dollars and productivity for California.

“We hurt ourselves by deporting people in a massive way, and the president is trying to hurt us by doing that,” said Morales, predicting legal challenges. “This is humanitarian, but (it’s) also economic. We have a lot to lose for those investments we made for various years.”

Alexei Koseff contributed to this report.

Christopher Cadelago: 916-326-5538, @ccadelago

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article129038699.html#storylink=cpy
 
One issue I can agree with Trump is need for stricter immigration law enforcement, and swift deportation of illegals who commit crime.

How can you claim to have a country of an illegal can commit a crime and then claim sanctuary or be allowed in again (and repeatedly as well!!!!!!!)

---

On Wednesday, Donald Trump signed an executive order aimed at cracking down on so-called “sanctuary cities,” which limit cooperation between state and local law enforcement and federal immigration agents. It follows through on his campaign-trail promise to withhold federal dollars from such cities, which might jeopardize support for services including education, health care, and housing for millions of American citizens.

According to the executive order, dubbed “Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States,” cities that do not comply with federal immigration enforcement agents “are not eligible to receive Federal grants, except as deemed necessary for law enforcement purposes by the Attorney General or the Secretary.” It also notes that the director of the Office of Management and Budget will be responsible for obtaining and providing “relevant and responsive information on all Federal grant money that currently is received by any sanctuary jurisdiction.” It is not clear, however, which grants are at jeopardy.

Earlier in the day, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said at the daily press briefing: “We're going to strip federal grant money from the sanctuary states and cities that harbor illegal immigrants. The American people are no longer going to have to be forced to subsidize this disregard for our laws.”

Sanctuary cities became a topic of debate during the 2016 presidential election. Trump had threatened to pull funding from jurisdictions that limit cooperation with federal authorities. But doing so is a complicated undertaking.

There’s no clear definition of a sanctuary city, but Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Department of Homeland Security’s enforcement arm, found that 165 jurisdictions across the country “have a specific policy limiting cooperation with federal authorities,” according to an analysis of ICE records obtained by The Texas Tribune. Federal officials rely on state and local law enforcement to identify people who may be in violation of immigration laws. In some jurisdictions, however, state and local forces will refuse to turn them over to federal authorities.

The process goes as follows: Police officers arrest immigrants for matters unrelated to their immigration status, and they are booked in local jails, where their fingerprints are taken and eventually shared with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, as is required by law. ICE will ask officials to hold individuals if they are in violation of immigration laws while ICE obtains a warrant. County and municipal policies dictate whether officials will comply, or instead release the individuals in question.

Following Trump’s election, mayors and governors nationwide reaffirmed their opposition to Trump’s position on sanctuary cities. Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti said the city would continue to be a sanctuary city: “Immigration is the responsibility of our federal government. We’ve been very clear it’s not the responsibility of LAPD.” He added: “We participate all the time with our federal immigration authorities and we will continue to do so. We just require, as the courts have decided, that there be a warrant.” Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy echoed concerns about Trump’s deportation strategy. New Haven Police Department spokesperson Officer David Hartman said there was no intention to change the city’s sanctuary policy.

Cities receive federal funding from several agencies, posing possible challenges for how a crackdown could be put into effect. While the executive branch administers most grants, “a lot of the statutory authority for those grants has very specific language about how they can or can’t allocate them,” Lena Graber, a special projects attorney at the Immigrant Legal Resource Center told me, adding “I think it’s sort of an open legal question about what the agencies can change without getting official legislation or congressional approval to the statutes enacting those grants.”

Graber also pointed to Supreme Court precedent as a possible obstacle. She argued that the 2012 ruling that upheld Obamacare, which said it’s unconstitutional to withdraw Medicaid funding if states did not agree to the expansion of the program, might also apply to requiring states to comply with federal immigration agents. Still, by ordering federal funds to be cut, the administration could put funding at risk for other areas, such as education and health care.

Jessica Vaughan, the director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, which supports reduced immigration, argues that compliance with federal immigration enforcement is important for “public safety reasons.” She said that there’s “better ways to build trust with immigrant communities than having sanctuary policies that obstruct immigration enforcement.”

But that’s an argument that cuts both ways. Previous immigration-enforcement initiatives, like the Secure Communities program, created a wedge between local law enforcement and communities, making them harder to police. That prompted a backlash from governors, mayors, and state and local enforcement officials. A crackdown on sanctuary cities might also risk creating conflict between local law enforcement and communities. Spicer said the administration also intends to “restore” the Secure Communities Program, “which will help ICE agents target illegal immigrants for removal.”
 
The common thread with Liberals on a whole range of issues is that they expect others and society to pay for all their indulgences. They either do not understand the consequences or ignore them.

From Brexit to Trump, to the rumblings in Netherlands, France and Germany it has been immigration. It not about genuine migrants nor is it genuine refugees. Its about illegal immigrants who have no merit nor in strife but take the shortcuts and jump over others. And they are helped by bleeding liberals.
 
The common thread with Liberals on a whole range of issues is that they expect others and society to pay for all their indulgences. They either do not understand the consequences or ignore them.

From Brexit to Trump, to the rumblings in Netherlands, France and Germany it has been immigration. It not about genuine migrants nor is it genuine refugees. Its about illegal immigrants who have no merit nor in strife but take the shortcuts and jump over others. And they are helped by bleeding liberals.

...these liberalized idiots also do not care the consequences of allowing in limitless number of immigrants ....100K, 200K, 1 million, numbers that are just arbitrarily fixed by some do good, ignorant twit....

No matter how rich a country is, how generous it is, such unthinking actions will only bring suffering and great burdens to their own people....competition for scarce resources, own poor and suffering people not taken care of, strained and limited infrastructure (medical, transport, living quarters)to handle added human load, , etc, etc..

Plus not forgetting the flood of opportunists, criminals and terrorist minded who will also come in together with the crowd.

....these liberalised idiots live in a world of their own...other people die or suffer, they don't care....they deserved to be condemned and uncovered for all the world to see their stupidity.....

Let's just wait and see if eventually all other suffering Californians will be willing to stand for such nonsense...at the expense of their own people...:o
 
criminal gangs and drug cartels from latin america are swarming to california knowing full well that state police (chp), local cops (city police), and county sheriffs are legally toothless and undermanned to be effective in handling them. that plus the proliferation of illegal weapons in the hands of criminals and organized crime. the life and work of any cop or correctional officer in california has never been more dangerous and precarious. at the same time, cops avoid inner cities and black ghettos as residents get killed by both random and gangland violence every week. for years there have been no arrest nor cases closed for black kids getting shot in the streets in oakland and richmond. lately, more black guys are getting killed by hispanic gangs. it's as though they are moving into black neighborhoods and taking over. i'm actually hoping for nigger gangbangers to fight back. murder rates in the 6 bay area sanctuary cities have spiked, and the new year is just beginning. don't think dems, liberals and leftists understand the saying...."the road to hell is paved with good intentions."
 
lately, more black guys are getting killed by hispanic gangs. it's as though they are moving into black neighborhoods and taking over. i'm actually hoping for nigger gangbangers to fight back. murder rates in the 6 bay area sanctuary cities have spiked, and the new year is just beginning. don't think dems, liberals and leftists understand the saying...."the road to hell is paved with good intentions."

Left leaning politicians are the same the world over. Minorities can get away with murder especially if they have darker skins because of the extreme fear that any firm and effective actions taken can be viewed as racist even when it comes to taking out some black or brown guy who has just committed mass murder and multiple rapes.

The so called "community leaders" will make statements like "If he was white the cops wouldn't have opened fire". "Why didn't they just taze him" or "they could have aimed for his knees".

Crime fighting has become so politicized that I don't blame any cops for just turning a blind eye. Why risk life and career for a thankless task.

The democrats are so fearful of losing the black vote, the brown vote, the latino vote (in nz's case the Maori and Islander vote) that they're happy to stick to their touchy feely approach in an effort to appease the very people who should be locked up. They know full well it costs lives and destroys neighborhoods but votes rank above all else.

Minority groups pose the biggest problem in countries where their vote can tip the scales either way because too many of the majority white folks actually believe that love trumps hate... obviously because they've lead cloistered lives where their biggest crisis has been a wardrobe mulfunction, a hurtful remark or a bad selfie.

The hollywood jet set are the biggest hypocrites at all. They condemn the proposed wall while living in homes that have walls that would put Trumps proposals to shame. They say build bridges instead walls but where is the bridge to their bedrooms so that their fans can have easy access to their delightful presence. They champion climate change initiatives while flying around in their private jets that spew greenhouse gases like you would not believe.

I don't hate the left because of their beliefs. I loath them because of their hypocrisy.
 
The hollywood jet set are the biggest hypocrites at all. They condemn the proposed wall while living in homes that have walls that would put Trumps proposals to shame. They say build bridges instead walls but where it the bridge to their bedrooms so that their fans can have easy access to their delightful presence. They champion climate change initiatives while flying around in their private jets that spew greenhouse gases like you would not believe.

I don't hate the left because of their beliefs. I loath them because of their hypocrisy.

silicon valley wealthy tech liberals and billionaires who are new age "progressives" are not far behind in the hypocrisy meter. apple (now under cook but not when jobs ran it), facebook and google have been known to be progressive paradise, and the very wealthy early employees and stock optionees bought multiple homes in adjacent lots, rezone them into large parcels, and build walls around the rezoned property to keep the neighborhood and prying eyes out. zuckerberg did exactly that in palo alto, and smaller neighbors are now fuming with the great wall of zuck. he is also restricting access to beaches on a hawaiian island by building walls and fences in his sprawling property there. a co-founder of sun microsystems who made his billions also fenced up access to the beach in half moon bay as he considers the access road and the beach section his private property. he lost the court case and was asked to open the road as all beaches and coastlines in the u.s. are meant for public use.
 
i agree,the liberals or should i say the liberal idiots should rename and rebrand themselves as the liberachi idiots.

[video=youtube;Pn7ImsFM13k]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn7ImsFM13k[/video]
 
silicon valley wealthy tech liberals and billionaires who are new age "progressives" are not far behind in the hypocrisy meter. apple (now under cook but not when jobs ran it), facebook and google have been known to be progressive paradise, and the very wealthy early employees and stock optionees bought multiple homes in adjacent lots, rezone them into large parcels, and build walls around the rezoned property to keep the neighborhood and prying eyes out. zuckerberg did exactly that in palo alto, and smaller neighbors are now fuming with the great wall of zuck. he is also restricting access to beaches on a hawaiian island by building walls and fences in his sprawling property there. a co-founder of sun microsystems who made his billions also fenced up access to the beach in half moon bay as he considers the access road and the beach section his private property. he lost the court case and was asked to open the road as all beaches and coastlines in the u.s. are meant for public use.

LKY did the same. The public are not allowed to use the "public" road where his old home is located. It's an open secret that LKY & Gecko were living at the Istana so why all the security around Oxley Road?

Property prices in that neighbourhood was also depressed because owners faced all kinds of restrictions about what they could do in their own homes.

If only his daughter was living there does she really need all that security?
 
LKY did the same. The public are not allowed to use the "public" road where his old home is located. It's an open secret that LKY & Gecko were living at the Istana so why all the security around Oxley Road?

If only his daughter was living there does she really need all that security?

Why not? remember ....a princess in waiting wo hhh for the knight in white....must guard the hi men purplely mah...

....to be touched for the very first time!!!!! .... LOL
 
Left leaning politicians are the same the world over. Minorities can get away with murder especially if they have darker skins because of the extreme fear that any firm and effective actions taken can be viewed as racist even when it comes to taking out some black or brown guy who has just committed mass murder and multiple rapes.

The so called "community leaders" will make statements like "If he was white the cops wouldn't have opened fire". "Why didn't they just taze him" or "they could have aimed for his knees".

Crime fighting has become so politicized that I don't blame any cops for just turning a blind eye. Why risk life and career for a thankless task.

The democrats are so fearful of losing the black vote, the brown vote, the latino vote (in nz's case the Maori and Islander vote) that they're happy to stick to their touchy feely approach in an effort to appease the very people who should be locked up. They know full well it costs lives and destroys neighborhoods but votes rank above all else.

Minority groups pose the biggest problem in countries where their vote can tip the scales either way because too many of the majority white folks actually believe that love trumps hate... obviously because they've lead cloistered lives where their biggest crisis has been a wardrobe mulfunction, a hurtful remark or a bad selfie.

The hollywood jet set are the biggest hypocrites at all. They condemn the proposed wall while living in homes that have walls that would put Trumps proposals to shame. They say build bridges instead walls but where is the bridge to their bedrooms so that their fans can have easy access to their delightful presence. They champion climate change initiatives while flying around in their private jets that spew greenhouse gases like you would not believe.

I don't hate the left because of their beliefs. I loath them because of their hypocrisy.


Well said..
 
[video=youtube;T_98ojjIZDI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_98ojjIZDI[/video]
 
[video=youtube;cV1XoclfexI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cV1XoclfexI[/video]
 
[video=youtube;w8KqDIPdCOg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8KqDIPdCOg&t=302s[/video]
 
[video=youtube;Wwy7pWvO3p0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wwy7pWvO3p0[/video]
 
Left leaning politicians are the same the world over. Minorities can get away with murder especially if they have darker skins because of the extreme fear that any firm and effective actions taken can be viewed as racist even when it comes to taking out some black or brown guy who has just committed mass murder and multiple rapes.

The so called "community leaders" will make statements like "If he was white the cops wouldn't have opened fire". "Why didn't they just taze him" or "they could have aimed for his knees".

Crime fighting has become so politicized that I don't blame any cops for just turning a blind eye. Why risk life and career for a thankless task.

The democrats are so fearful of losing the black vote, the brown vote, the latino vote (in nz's case the Maori and Islander vote) that they're happy to stick to their touchy feely approach in an effort to appease the very people who should be locked up. They know full well it costs lives and destroys neighborhoods but votes rank above all else.

Minority groups pose the biggest problem in countries where their vote can tip the scales either way because too many of the majority white folks actually believe that love trumps hate... obviously because they've lead cloistered lives where their biggest crisis has been a wardrobe mulfunction, a hurtful remark or a bad selfie.

The hollywood jet set are the biggest hypocrites at all. They condemn the proposed wall while living in homes that have walls that would put Trumps proposals to shame. They say build bridges instead walls but where is the bridge to their bedrooms so that their fans can have easy access to their delightful presence. They champion climate change initiatives while flying around in their private jets that spew greenhouse gases like you would not believe.

I don't hate the left because of their beliefs. I loath them because of their hypocrisy.

i'm sure somehow this doesn't apply to SG all because the majority aren't white but Chinese am i correct? :rolleyes:
 
i'm sure somehow this doesn't apply to SG all because the majority aren't white but Chinese am i correct? :rolleyes:

Yes, you are correct. Chinese helicopters like yourself believe hate trumps love. You are in the same league as tanwahtiu and all those lovely commie chinks in this forum.
 
Yes, you are correct. Chinese helicopters like yourself believe hate trumps love. You are in the same league as tanwahtiu and all those lovely commie chinks in this forum.

what trumps love? Can you write better engrish?
 
Back
Top