Trump pressures 'sanctuary cities' that won't hold undocumented immigrants

[Garnier Fructis]

I really don't know why you think this is a great gotcha. The person you replied to didn't use the word "crime". He mistakenly said "entered illegally", but "remained illegally" does not change his point one jot or iota.

Correcting something that's wrong is not always meant as a gotcha. I basically mention it as a matter of reflex now, because while he didn't explicitly call it a crime, people who make this argument on this forum almost always do.

[mage21]

well I can only hope they get nothing done on this front. Because I know for a fact these assholes probably aren't going after European or hell even Asian illegals. Just the brown people that mow yards.

They do more than mow yards!



Ironically, they're building a wall.

I work alongside these guys, they're hard working. And I get along great with them; they're people just like me. And between the very limited to no English skills, decidedly paisa attire, and hot plate cooking in the parking lot, many of them are probably first-generation. I don't care if a single one of them is illegal. I don't think it's right to have come over illegally, but these are not people that deserve scrutiny. Who I do think deserve scrutiny are not these guys (unless they're committing identity theft or some other crime), they're the criminal aliens who have committed crimes in addition to illegally immigrating. I think those people should absolutely receive scrutiny, and I think it's outrageous that cities are protecting these people. I think that's a reasonable stance on the subject, and I think that if these cities are going to engage in this type of thing, they should be held accountable, especially when there are deaths directly attributable to sanctuary city policies.

[Kujako]

Wan't to get rid of illegal immigration? Make it easier to go back and forth over the border. Before we had a hissy fit and started trying to stop people getting into the country, people would come here, work for six months, and then go home. Now, because if they go home they may not be able to get back next year for work, they stay and we have an "immigration crisis".

[Deleted]

Your post was nothing but belittling, condescending bullshit and now you are whining that I redirected that same back at you?

is there a point to this unprovoked attack that you have been reported for?

[Slybak]

While pointing out Republican hypocrisy on state's rights is fair game, it's also worth noting that in no sense is there any real legal precedent for states determining immigration policy.

Except they don't. "Sanctuary Cities" are termed as such because they do not use municipal resources to enforce Federal immigration statutes (specifically, Title 8 Section 1325) and/or forbid local law enforcement to from initiating any police action (arrest, search, questioning, etc) against someone for the purpose of discovering their immigration status. They are, effectively, agreeing that the enforcement of Federal immigration law is the responsibility of Federal law enforcement agencies.

An EO that unilaterally defunds states that allow for Sanctuary City laws does not, however, just have implications with respect to Federalism. There's also a separation of powers issue in such an order's circumvention of Congressional appropriations.

[alexkeren]

I have no problem arresting people who cause harm. I have a huge problem trying to punish people for being illegal immigrants. If ICE wants to punish people for being illegals, I'm not going to support it. I'm going to go ahead and side with freedom, thanks.

But they were arrested by LEOs because they committed assault and such. The locals release them, in many cases without further prosecution for the local/state laws they broke that got them arrested in the first place. Glad you're fine with people who should be in jail for the assault charges going free.

[Darththeo]

People displaying their ideological preferences by calling them "immigrants"...gg. The correct legal term is "illegal aliens". Use it. Know it. Stop being cowed by the loudmouths claiming racism when you use the proper legal term. It has nothing to do with color of skin or race or religion. This is the same stupidity that caused a senator to get in trouble for using the word "niggardly" properly in a sentence (and before you show your own stupidity look it up.) Everyone had a fit calling him racist and it never let up. Educated people understand that all of those idiots calling him names were stupid and that he used the word correctly.

This is the same mentality; illegal aliens broke this country's federal laws by entering illegally (thus the term.) This makes them law breakers the second they step foot on our soil. These are indisputable facts that cannot be decried by any rational person. What the President wants is to send them back to their own country so that they can stand in line like the rest of the immigrants and fill out the forms and pay the small fees and learn about our country and say the pledge and become a real citizen. We don't want these illegal aliens to be allowed to get a driver's license, get on welfare, get free education and free housing, and frankly take from the country that they despise so much since they broke the law to get here to partake of our bountifulness (izzatawurd?)

There is a process; they simply need to follow it. Now, if your argument is that the process sucks...well that's a whole different thing and requires discussion in a separate thread. I'm hoping the President blocks all federal grants and contracts to those cities even if he has to make up a reason...they will know why.

First off, immigrants is not an inappropriate term. What you are doing is like complaining someone went out and caught some fish and you go "You caught trout!" A trout is still a fish. Learn what terms mean before you tell someone else to, else you look like an uneducated hypocrite. The reason people use immigrants rather than illegal aliens is that not just illegal aliens are going to be affected by certain policies. All immigrants do.

Secondly, the reason people make it a racial issue is because the only illegals that get mentioned are those who come from Mexico and farther South who tend to be classified as Hispanic. Despite the fact that illegal immigrants from those countries have been declining over the past few years so all focusing on those people comes off racially motivated even if it isn't. Calling someone a racist because they come off as a racist isn't a problem in my eyes. A person who isn't a racist would be able to defend his argument with something other than talking points.

Thirdly, illegal aliens may have immigrated legally (some estimates have this over 40% of all illegal aliens). So these people didn't enter the country illegally. The term "illegal alien" is a misnomer as they may have entered legally and overstayed a visa (some of whom isn't even their fault.) They may have actually done nothing illegal but rather be unlawfully present in the country.

Fourthly, no one is arguing these people didn't break a law. We are arguing about what is appropriate actions for these people who broke the law to insure their rights. Intent matters in law and should be factor into the punishment. Even criminals have rights in this country. If you think otherwise, it is you who are being irrational.

You are aware that in order to get welfare you have to have a valid SSN right? You don't get much unless you are here legally and if they are getting those services being illegal they are breaking more laws then just being here illegally. They would have to have stolen an identity of a citizen or made a fake social to pass screening (which is harder than it sounds). Also, a lot of these illegal immigrants actually help pay for those programs. Stop this myth.

And your last argument is you hope the President abuses his powers ... well that just shows your ignorance.

[Fencers]

What a hypocrite, ha! Not surprising, natch.

[Arterus]

You are aware that in order to get welfare you have to have a valid SSN right? You don't get much unless you are here legally and if they are getting those services being illegal they are breaking more laws then just being here illegally. They would have to have stolen an identity of a citizen or made a fake social to pass screening (which is harder than it sounds). Also, a lot of these illegal immigrants actually help pay for those programs. Stop this myth.

And your last argument is you hope the President abuses his powers ... well that just shows your ignorance.

That is not a myth. While legally they are not allowed to receive these benefits in many states they do wind up receiving them anyway. Just as in many states you can sign up for voter registration without a SSN, particularly California.Technically they should not receive anything other than Education k-12 and emergency care. But as stated before that is not always the case.

Its not an abuse of power, the president is the chief federal law enforcer. The Bureau of Immigration is a federal government service. It is completely in his power to do what he is doing.

The truth is a lot of people legal and illegal are not paying into the system they are using, and there are many more immigrants that come illegally from Latin origins. Its not about deporting "brown people" its about deporting illegal immigrants. Having undocumented immigrants is bad for any country, hence why the United States and Mexico joint funded the Mexican southern border wall.

[quras]

I'm OK with it. You break another countries laws (be it their immigration or others) don't expect the government that you are not a citizen of to support you. I have no issue with that.

[Graeham]

I don't see a problem with this. There are legal routes to pursue if someone wishes to become a citizen of another country - and there isn't enough room or resources to let anybody and everybody show up. Especially if it's unannounced and involves ignoring the establishes laws.

[Darththeo]

That is not a myth. While legally they are not allowed to receive these benefits in many states they do wind up receiving them anyway. Just as in many states you can sign up for voter registration without a SSN, particularly California.Technically they should not receive anything other than Education k-12 and emergency care. But as stated before that is not always the case.

Its not an abuse of power, the president is the chief federal law enforcer. The Bureau of Immigration is a federal government service. It is completely in his power to do what he is doing.

The truth is a lot of people legal and illegal are not paying into the system they are using, and there are many more immigrants that come illegally from Latin origins. Its not about deporting "brown people" its about deporting illegal immigrants. Having undocumented immigrants is bad for any country, hence why the United States and Mexico joint funded the Mexican southern border wall.

And the numbers you are describing are so small it actually will cost more money then it will save to hunt those people down. Hence this is why it is a myth. When you actually know the numbers, the fact it is even considered an issue at all makes little sense.

Yes, law enforcer ... you don't punish someone who says "I ain't doing your job for you" which is what he would doing. That isn't the same as law enforcement, that is 100% abuse of power as it violates the rights of the States.

A lot yes, percentage wise though it isn't. You know how to manipulate numbers right? For example, we have about an average of 3% unemployment insurance fraud. Some of those are unintentional where they didn't know you had to report wages when earned so they may have collected one or two unemployment checks beyond what they should have. If I wanted to make it sound like a problem ... I would say that thousands upon thousands of people collect unemployment while working ... stealing money from those who pay in. This isn't wrong, it isn't a lie. But, what it does is spread the Myth people abuse the system. Just because something is supported by facts doesn't make it not a myth. If you can't understand this, there is really no reason to respond to me.

[Paranoid Android]

I'm OK with it. You break another countries laws (be it their immigration or others) don't expect the government that you are not a citizen of to support you. I have no issue with that.

I will point out one more time. Businesses hire these immigrants. No accountability? Of course not, its easier to attack the people with no political support. Most illegals actually come here to work. Why? Our businesses LOVE cheap labor. We have two choices; 1) Reform our work visa program to allow access or 2) actually businesses pay a wage American citizens will work and live.

Before I get labeled a fan of illegal immigrants. No. I want secure borders and people entering here legally.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't see a problem with this. There are legal routes to pursue if someone wishes to become a citizen of another country - and there isn't enough room or resources to let anybody and everybody show up. Especially if it's unannounced and involves ignoring the establishes laws.

Business LOVES cheap labor. If there is a demand for cheap labor it needs to be filled. Both parties seem to shy away from the true culprit, business demand for cheap labor.

[belleflop]

All these ICE resources to put out a list? A bit whiny don't you think Trump? Why not just order your army to round up all undocumented individuals and kick them out. What's that? You have limited funds, you would be breaking the law (mostly state laws) and the breaking multiple amendments of the constitution? UGH.. That stupid constitution, always getting in the way!

[Darththeo]

I'm OK with it. You break another countries laws (be it their immigration or others) don't expect the government that you are not a citizen of to support you. I have no issue with that.

The United States is different.

Proof:

1) Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

2) A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

4) The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

5) No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

9) The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The United States recognizes that people have rights ... not just citizens. And before you say "They meant Citizens" they didn't ... they would have used citizen like they did elsewhere in the Constitution ... they on purpose used people.

[Arterus]

And the numbers you are describing are so small it actually will cost more money then it will save to hunt those people down. Hence this is why it is a myth. When you actually know the numbers, the fact it is even considered an issue at all makes little sense.

Yes, law enforcer ... you don't punish someone who says "I ain't doing your job for you" which is what he would doing. That isn't the same as law enforcement, that is 100% abuse of power as it violates the rights of the States.

A lot yes, percentage wise though it isn't. You know how to manipulate numbers right? For example, we have about an average of 3% unemployment insurance fraud. Some of those are unintentional where they didn't know you had to report wages when earned so they may have collected one or two unemployment checks beyond what they should have. If I wanted to make it sound like a problem ... I would say that thousands upon thousands of people collect unemployment while working ... stealing money from those who pay in. This isn't wrong, it isn't a lie. But, what it does is spread the Myth people abuse the system. Just because something is supported by facts doesn't make it not a myth. If you can't understand this, there is really no reason to respond to me.

I think you are greatly underestimating . A k-12 education is on average $100,000.00 USD, multiply that by a conservative number of around 2 million illegal children in the public school system. That is costing the tax payers $200,000,000,000.00 USD. And thats a conservative estimate, there are more than 2 million illegal children in the USA. So tell me, what could we do with that much money? Maybe invest it in our terrible education system? We are the richest country in the world and we still rank 14th.

Actually, thats called obstruction. obstruction is a punishable offense in the law. Next time someone is getting arrested, block the cops car in and say. "Well, I was here first I ain't moving." See how quickly you will get charged.

So, you think that there are a greater percentage of illegal immigrants from Asia or Africa? Thats impossible, illegal immigration statistics in 2012 show 8.5million immigrants from Mexico and Central/South America. 1.7million from Asia. I think you're a bit confused. You can't argue with hard numbers. Or are you talking about the millions of dollars that I've already shown you from just once service they take advantage of.

[Darththeo]

I think you are greatly underestimating . A k-12 education is on average $100,000.00 USD, multiply that by a conservative number of around 2 million illegal children in the public school system. That is costing the tax payers $200,000,000,000.00 USD. And thats a conservative estimate, there are more than 2 million illegal children in the USA. So tell me, what could we do with that much money? Maybe invest it in our terrible education system? We are the richest country in the world and we still rank 14th.

Actually, thats called obstruction. obstruction is a punishable offense in the law. Next time someone is getting arrested, block the cops car in and say. "Well, I was here first I ain't moving." See how quickly you will get charged.

So, you think that there are a greater percentage of illegal immigrants from Asia or Africa? Thats impossible, immigration statistics in 2012 show 8.5million immigrants from Mexico and Central/South America. 1.7million from Asia. I think you're a bit confused. You can't argue with hard numbers. Or are you talking about the millions of dollars that I've already shown you from just once service they take advantage of.

You are aware illegals who own property in the US pay taxes on it right? You are aware that many pay income tax right? You are aware they pay sales tax right? And why are you using total for the entire education to make your point? Did you not paid attention to my part about the manipulation of numbers? You do know that over half the cost per student is salary for the teachers and other professionals right? That reduces the "cost" of illegal immigrants by half right there. Or do you think teachers and administration staff would get paid less with less students?

Illegal immigrants pay just like legal ones do and citizens. They pay taxes. They pay for the services you say they have no right to. They pay just like you and me.

And no, it isn't obstruction unless you actively impede them. If a police officer asks you to block someone else, you can tell them to fuck off. You are not required to do their job. Seriously, are you this clueless? Obstruction is active. If you choose not to move your car, you are acting not to move.

And no, I don't think that. I am saying that illegal immigrants from Latin America have been decreasing .... not they aren't a problem. Also, you have shown not that we are talking millions ... we are talking far less than that. Also, the best number I can find has cost per student being 11,000 approximately per year ... or about 143,000 for the entire education (so you were low there). Also, there are 705600 approximate illegal immigrant in k to 12 ... not even close to 2 million. So the "cost of illegals" for education is no better than 1/4th what you stated even giving you a reasonable benefit of doubt.

Just to let you know. This is assuming the illegal immigrants parents do not pay any taxes (they do), that the cost of staff is 50% (it isn't, its much higher), and that the children's parents and child never become citizens (and who is to say they won't). At best, education costs 50,000,000,000 not 200,000,000,000. See? Myth.

Sources:

http://www.governing.com/gov-data/ed...upil-data.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.ccf9d5a264a7
https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=372

[Glorious Leader]

"states rights!", unless they don't do what we want.

did you really think a little old thing like being blatant hypocrites would ever have stopped their agenda? They have governing to do man. Frankly I'd be SHOCKED if the obvious bullshit ever crossed their radar.

[Barnabas]

Nice rant.

You do know that the American Business love cheap labor. The created the demand for cheap labor. Yes people who entered here illegally came for job opportunities. The past 8 plus years on trending illegal immigrants have shown this. When our economy went in the shitter, so did illegal immigration became stagnant.

Instead people of your ilk love blaming one side. Most illegals come here and work, but it is easier to blame them for all the problems instead of the other side that is breaking the law much more than people trying to find jobs. Also don't get me started on businesses choosing illegals over "citizens" by not paying a wage people can live on.

Now the demand for cheap labor has always been there. You do that Europeans provided most of the cheap labor in the early 20th century. Plus being prior the U.S. just needed people to fill out all this land we had. Our large Chinese immigrants in 1800's was do the fact of cheap labor for the railroads.

So if you want cheap labor have a comprehensive immigration or work visa program that admits people to do the labor we choose not to do. Otherwise as I stated, maybe pay a wage and choose to hire U.S. citizens. Remember if there is one illegal and one US citizen. The employer still has the choice in who to hire. To be fair, you can say that the one "bad apple" makes it tough for US businesses. Example being, that if your competitor uses cheap illegal labor to drive down costs, then you might be forced. Still no excuse.

So maybe look at the other side instead of pointing the finger at just one side. I am in favor of secure border and even U.S. citizens doing the jobs. For a good wage though. What I do know that just pointing the finger at one group is not looking at the whole problem. Honestly trends on xenophobia.

Yet here you are advocating for american business to obtain the cheap labor without having to go through a visa process that exists.

[Darththeo]

Yet here you are advocating for american business to obtain the cheap labor without having to go through a visa process that exists.

That's not what he is doing at all.