Sanctuary city policies do you know why?
 

It is unconstitutional to hold people for no reason. Being illegal was ruled no reason in federal court and thus cities who hold people for ICE after other reasons have been resolved can be sued.

So illegal migrants can now sue the country. Why not just ship them home the moment they file a complaint?

Or is that illegal as well?

Yeah, but that's not what's happening, these sanctuary cities are letting people go after they kill people, so that's a big fuck you!

Suspect in fatal hit-and-run wanted by ICE; sheriff’s department refuses to honor detainer | FOX31 Denver

To add insult to injury, they're (the ACLU) asking the cops to NOT arrest illegals for minor crimes so they don't get into the court system and potentially deported. As for you and I the regular rules apply.. if you're illegal you're free to commit misdemeanors.

You are twisting the facts here.

From my point of view, anyone who is caught in the United States illegally should be arrested and deported. I do not care of they have a car, a house, a business, or children. The children should be deported too.

But you are missing two things here.

Local police should not be releasing people from custody to federal agents. A crime has been committed and this needs to be followed through on. If federal agents take custody of this person, those charges go unanswered. If federal agents want to arrest him afterwards, that's fine.

Then... Local police should not be involved in such matters. If a federal crime is committed, local police is not called in to arrest someone. Federal agents have to do that. (Local law enforcement might be asked to assist if needed.) The reason why is simple... My local police department has anywhere from 3 - 5 officers working at any given time. My local PD does not have the ability to detain people, and they are brought to the county jail. Without even discussing illegal immigration, this has a huge impact on the time of our local law enforcement. If we have three officers on duty and one of them has to transport someone to the county jail, we lose 33% of our police force for an hour (or longer). My local police department just cannot arrest one out of every four persons it comes into contact with because they are here illegally and breaking federal law. They just don't have the resources to do this.

So in your mind Local law enforcement don't have to enforce federal laws? Are you kidding here?
I mean you could say the same thing about Kiddie porn, that's a federal crime, are not the local police suppose to enforce that?

What you are saying they have the right to pick and choose what they enforce, if that's the case, they should hand in their fucking badges! That's not their job, their job is to enforce the law.

here's a list of federal laws
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federa..._United_States

Lost my best friend to an illegal alien that was cited 3 times for not having a drivers license, then this fucked up state gave him a license and he got drunk and killed my best friend and didn't even stop to see if he was ok, just drove home and went to sleep. They gave him a licence 3 months before he killed someone and he only got 1 year. I not only hope he gets deported, I hope he dies in a slow painful way after serving the year in jail that left one person dead and one crippled for life. I also hope the politician responsible for the sanctuary laws is killed by an illegal alien.

Yeah I've seen this a lot, minor crimes being ignored so they claim a reduction in crime. The court system in California is a joke and the judge at one trial actually said he was concerned if the guy that killed my best friend would be deported after he was released. They asked me to leave the court house after what I told the judge about my concerns

You seem to be confused about how the law works. You seem to believe that the law is the law, and that all law enforcement enforces the same laws. This is not correct.

My local police enforces local laws, not federal laws. For example, if you are cheating on the IRS, the IRS does not call up my local police and demand an investigation. Another example is if someone here in my hometown is hacking a bank in NYC they wouldn't call my local police department, but instead at the FBI. They have federal agents for this.

At the same exact time, the FBI does not park their car off the freeway and pull people over for speeding.

Do you understand this now?

Above you mentioned "kiddie porn". You mentioned it is a federal law and this is very true. However, it's also a violation of local law and as such my local PD can step in.

However... My police department does not have the resources to devote it's entire, effort, and money into chasing illegal aliens. It has nothing to do with illegal immigration and everything to do with the resources of my local PD. The IRS doesn't call up my local PD and say "We believe these one hundred and four people are lying about their tax returns and demand you investigate" because my local PD doesn't have the resources to handle this. It's the same thing with hacking or spying; This is handled by federal agents. It's the exact same thing with illegal immigration. If my local PD had to arrest everyone they came into contact with that was here illegally we would physically have no police officers on the street because they would be too busy arresting everyone and spending all of their transporting them to the county lock up.

I agree with you about illegal immigration. However, my local PD does not have the resources to do this. We have ICE and Border Patrol to handle this.

Your local law enforcement doesn't have a task force for federal crimes, but are they ignoring federal laws by letting criminals go without notifying ICE when they get an illegal alien? When you get arrested, because of 9-11, a full background check is done and you are rarely let loose in less than 24 hours these days, even if you can make bail, it's the local PD I have a problem with that are ignoring federal laws because of sanctuary city's rules, fuck them.

FEDERAL IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT

The federal courts have repeatedly held that the power to regulate immigration is exclusively vested in the federal government. To implement its exclusive power, the federal government has enacted and extensively amended the INA (8 USC §§ 1101 et seq.). The INA establishes a set of rules for legal immigration and naturalization, provides a system for processing and deporting illegal immigrants, and specifies civil and criminal penalties for violations. To enforce the INA, Congress created a national immigration bureaucracy—the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS).

Criminal violations of the INA include such offenses as:

1. bringing in and harboring of certain undocumented aliens; (8 USC § 1324),

2. illegal entry of aliens; (8 USC § 1325(a)),

3. document fraud; (8 USC § 1324c),

4. reentry of aliens previously excluded or deported; (8 USC § 1326)

5. aiding or assisting aliens to enter illegally; (8 USC § 1327)

6. disobeying a removal order; (8 USC § 1253(a)),

7. registration of aliens; (8 USC § 1306),

8. importing aliens for immoral purposes; (8 USC § 1328), and

9. pattern or practice of hiring illegal aliens; (8 USC § 1324a(f)).

Express Authorization for State and Local Law Enforcement Officers to Enforce Immigration Law

The INA contains three provisions that explicitly authorize state and local police to enforce federal immigration laws (8 USC §§ 1357(g), 1103(a)(8), and 1253c. The following is taken directly from the March 11, 2004 CRS report on the ability of state and local police to enforce the INA (copy enclosed).

8 USC § 1357(g)

USC § 1357(g) authorizes the U.S. attorney general to enter into a written agreement with a state or municipality pursuant to which a state or municipal officer or employee, who the attorney general determines to be qualified to perform a function of an immigration officer in relation to the investigation, apprehension, or detention of aliens in the United States may carry out such function at the state's or municipality's expense as long as it is consistent with state and local law.

Section 1357(g) permits state and local entities to tailor an agreement with the attorney general to meet local needs. The written agreement must specify the powers and duties that may or must be performed, and the duration of the authority. The entities must know and follow federal law governing immigration officers and must receive adequate training regarding the enforcement of immigration laws. The U.S. attorney general must direct and supervise the officers performing immigration functions under this law. Such officers are not federal employees except for certain tort claims and compensation matters, but they do enjoy federal immunity.

8 USC § 1103(a)(8)

Under 8 USC § 1103(a)(8), state and local officers may exercise the civil or criminal arrest powers of federal immigration officers (1) when expressly authorized by the U.S. attorney general; (2) when given consent by the head of the state or local law enforcement agency; and (3) the attorney general determination of an emergency exists because of a mass influx of aliens. This authority can be exercised only during the emergency situation. The attorney general can shorten or waive the otherwise normally required training requirements when necessary to protect public safety, public health, or national security.

8 USC §1252c


8 USC § 1252c authorizes state and local officers to arrest aliens who have presumably violated § 276 of the INA (Reentry of Removed Alien). Under § 1252c, state and local law enforcement officials can arrest and detain anyone who:

1. is an alien illegally present in the United States and

2. has previously been convicted of a felony in the United States and deported or left the United States after such conviction, but only after the state or local law enforcement officials obtain appropriate confirmation from INS of his status and only for as long as may be required for INS to take the individual into Federal custody for purposes of deporting or removing him from the United States.

Implied Authorization to Enforce INA

According to a recent Congressional Research Service (CRS) report to Congress, federal law does not preclude state and local officers from enforcing the criminal provisions of the INA. Thus, they may engage in such enforcement if state law permits them to do so, apart from the three provisions summarized above (Enforcing Immigration Law: The Role of State and Local Law Enforcement, March 11, 2004). This view has been supported by court cases in other jurisdictions, opinions of the U.S. (DOJ) and the attorney generals of New York and California.

Court Cases

Gonzales v. City of Peoria. In Gonzales v. City of Peoria, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that federal law does not preclude local enforcement of the criminal provisions of the INA (722 F.2d 468, 475 (9th Cir. 1983)). The Gonzalez case examined the city's policies, which authorized its police officers to arrest illegal immigrants for violating the criminal entry provisions of the INA (8 USC § 1324). The defendants argued that federal law prohibited state and local police officers from making such arrests. The court held that local police officers may, subject to state law, constitutionally stop or detain people when there is reasonable suspicion or, in the case of arrests, probable cause that they have violated, or are violating, the criminal provisions of the INA.

People v. Barajas. Likewise, in People v. Barajas, the California Court of Appeal upheld the authority of California local police officers to make arrests for violations of two provisions of the INA, 8 USC § 1325 (the illegal entry misdemeanor) and § 1326 (felony for alien to re-enter United States after deportation) (81 Cal. App.3d 999, (1978)). The court rejected the defendant's argument that the arrest was illegal under INA warrant requirements, (8 USC § 1357).

United States v. Salinas-Calderon. The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a state trooper has general investigatory authority to inquire into possible immigration violations and to make arrests for violation of federal law (United States v. Salinas-Calderon, 728 F. 2d 1298 (10th Cir. 1984)). In this case, a state trooper pulled over the defendant for driving erratically. He found six people in the back of the defendant's truck. After questing the passenger he learned that the driver and the others were in the country illegally. The court determined that the trooper had probable cause to detain and arrest all the individuals.

United States v. Vasquez-Alvarez. In a subsequent case, the Tenth Circuit considered the arrest by an Oklahoma police officer of a person suspected of drug dealing because he was an “illegal alien” (United States v. Vasquez-Alvarez, 176 F3d 1294 (10th Cir. 1999)). The arresting officer did not know when he made the arrest whether the defendant had committed a civil or criminal violation of INA. A specific provision in the INA (8 USC § 1252c) authorizes state officers to pick up and hold for deportation a previously deported alien who had been convicted of a crime in the United States and reentered illegally. The law requires state officers to obtain confirmation from the INS before making such an arrest. It was only after the arrest that it was discovered that the alien had a history of prior criminal convictions and deportations.

The defendant argued that the state police could only arrest him in compliance with the restrictions detailed in 8 USC § 1252c. Since his arrest did not meet the requirements of that provision, the defendant argued the arrest was unauthorized. The court held that § 1252c does not limit or displace the preexisting general authority of state or local police officers to investigate and make arrests for violations of the INA.

United States v. Santana-Garcia. The Tenth Circuit again considered the role of local law enforcement of immigration laws in United States v. Santana-Garcia, 264 F3d 1188 (10th Cir. 2001)). A Utah police officer stopped a vehicle for a traffic violation. The driver didn't speak English or have a driver's license. The officer learned that the driver and his passenger were traveling from Mexico to Colorado and that they were not legally in the country. The court held that the officer had probable cause to arrest both defendants for suspected violation of federal immigration law and concluded that state and local police officers have implicit authority within their respective jurisdictions to investigate and make arrests for violations of immigration law.

How do you not get this?

My local police department does not open investigations into people who cheat on their taxes and arrest them. The IRS does this.

My local police department does not open investigations into international spy cases. The FBI does this.

My local police department does not handle animal control calls. The county handles this.

Local police departments do not launch investigations into federal crimes. They do not go after tax evaders, spies, hackers, etc.

My local police department does not have the staff to handle these issues. They do not have the staff, the facilities, or the money to handle this.

Does ICE come to town and pull over speeders? Of course not. They aren't set up for that, nor do they have to time to ticket local drivers.

We have federal departments to handle immigration issues. We have ICE and Border Patrol. They do their jobs, not enforce local speed limits.

You are ignoring what I'm saying, I get it, waste of time. You are talking about something different than what I'm talking about so you don't have to agree you're wrong.

Have a great weekend, I'm going to grand reopening of Hell's Kitchen tomorrow with friends.

Wrong. Illegals have due process rights. They don't have a right to remain here illegally.

Well, since they're not legal American citizens, our laws don't apply to them. They're not entitled to follow laws. The only thing they're entitled to is welfare. And free housing. And food stamps. And a red carpet at the border.

If you have any problem with that, you're a racist and you want to enslave them and make them work on your plantation. Last time I checked, slavery is against the law. However, its not against the law for a Mexican to make you a slave. Because as I said, our laws don't apply to them. So be careful who you're racist to. You may find yourself working on a plantation ran by José.

The solution is simple. Pay a lot more in taxes so the Government can afford a better and bigger police force. You only get out of a Government what you put in.

When I overstayed my visa ICE put me in holding centers for 6 and a half months before sending me back to the UK. The maximum time they could legally hold me was 6 months, but they stretched it to 6 and a half buy not counting me being processed in and processed out...

I had not committed any other actual crime, over and above overstaying (Was not dealing drugs or stealing from people etc) and I had my own funds available to travel back to the UK immediately.

I had entered the USA legally on a tourist visa, however by the time I was 'discovered' I was also legally married to an american woman, who was born there. Despite that, they still kept me in for 6 and a half months, because being very low risk, the earnt more money keeping me, in government subsidies, than it cost to feed and house me.

I am not complaining - I did overstay etc - However its just an example of how unfair the system can be...

You are allowed due process regardless of nationality in our country.

Jewish posters / propogandists like the OP want majority-white countries to become majority non-white.

Bear that in mind before arguing with them.