Senate Democrats Block Kate's Law, Anti-Sanctuary City Law

anatta

100% recycled karma
Two Senate bills designed to protect American citizens from illegal immigrants died on the Senate floor Wednesday afternoon, Kate's law and a bill to defund cities that grant sanctuary to illegal immigrants. Each of the bills garnered support from a majority of senators - but not the 60 votes necessary to avoid a filibuster.

One of the two bills was Kate's Law, which would have strengthened the sentences for people who are caught entering the country illegally two or more times.

Introduced by Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), the legislation is named after Kate Steinle, the 32-year-old woman who was killed in July 2015 by an illegal alien who had several felony convictions and had been deported from the United States five times. Ms. Steinle was shot to death while she was walking along the San Francisco pier with her dad.

Kate's law was designed to strengthen federal law by increasing the maximum sentence for illegal reentry into the U.S. to five years. It created a new illegal reentry penalty of up to 10 years for anyone who had previously been denied admission or deported at least three times, and would have imposed a five-year mandatory minimum sentence for anyone convicted of illegal reentry who had a prior aggravated felony or had been convicted of illegal reentry twice before.

The final vote on Kate's law was 55-42, five less than needed for cloture.

After the vote, Senator Cruz remarked:
It is disappointing to see Democratic leaders stand with convicted felons rather than the American people. Once again, many Democrats have politicized an issue that shouldn't be a red state/blue state issue. Americans are tired of politicians standing with violent criminal illegal aliens. This should bring us together. We should protect the American people.

The second bill, the Stop Dangerous Sanctuary Cities Act, was introduced by Senator Pat Toomey (R-PA). The sanctuary city bill also has ties to Kate Steinle. Four months before Ms. Steinle was murdered, her accused killer Juan Lopez-Sanchez, was in federal prison for re-entering the country after his fifth deportation. As his deportation neared, the federal prison officials transferred him to the San Francisco sheriffm who had an outstanding warrant on him for an old marijuana possession violation.

When he was transferred, immigration officials issued an "immigration detainer," requesting they be notified before his release so they could take custody of Lopez-Sanchez and begin the deportation process. But, because San Francisco is a sanctuary city, on April 15th Juan Lopez-Sanchez was released without notifying immigration officials. Kate Steinle was murdered two and a half months later on July 1st.


The Stop Dangerous Sanctuary Cities Act would have blocked federal funding for local governments that restrict their law enforcement officers from cooperating with immigration officials. At the same time, the bill would have absolved the local governments who allow their police to cooperate from legal liability, but would have allowed people wrongfully detained to seek compensation from the federal Department of Homeland Security.

Toomey's bill fell seven votes short of the 60 votes needed to cut off debate, 53-44. After the vote, the Pennsylvania Republican said,

Despite the support of a bipartisan majority, the Senate has once again failed to act on a critical public safety issue.
Sanctuary cities are Orwellian in their logic -- they give extra protection to dangerous criminals, just because they happen to be in the country illegally. This is a dangerous injustice that must be stopped, and I will continue to fight it.

Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) led the opposition to the bills, claiming that putting repeat violators of immigration law into prison would end up overcrowding prisons and cost Americans billions of dollars. But, it seemed his real objection was based on presidential politics: Republicans are legislating Donald Trump’s vision that immigrants and Latinos are criminals and threats to the public.

To some, it may be ironic that the same political party which staged a sit-in on the House floor because they think they can to save lives by taking away gun rights of Americans won’t allow a vote on two bills designed to strengthen enforcement of laws and protect the lives of American citizens from criminal acts by people who have trespassed their way into the country.
http://www.mrctv.org/blog/senate-de...ation-bills-kates-law-anti-sanctuary-city-law
 
Reid is human garbage.
"overcrowding " is bullsh*t. It's a craven attempt to curry favor with Hispanics -but it's insulting to all Americans-
including law abiding Hispanics.

It only goes to re-entry by aggrevated felons.
 
Reid is human garbage.
"overcrowding " is bullsh*t. It's a craven attempt to curry favor with Hispanics -but it's insulting to all Americans-
including law abiding Hispanics.

It only goes to re-entry by aggrevated felons.

Well, my opinion is totally different from yours, and there are law abiding Hispanics who don't agree with you, and it doesn't insult me because like I have always stated, if Republicans were serious about illegals they would hit business and people who hire them, hard, and they just aren't going to do that, so this indicates to me that they just aren't serious about illegal immigrants. They can bully and bluster all they want, but they don't do what would be most effective.
 
Well, my opinion is totally different from yours, and there are law abiding Hispanics who don't agree with you, and it doesn't insult me because like I have always stated, if Republicans were serious about illegals they would hit business and people who hire them, hard, and they just aren't going to do that, so this indicates to me that they just aren't serious about illegal immigrants. They can bully and bluster all they want, but they don't do what would be most effective.

How do you justify those here illegally who have committed crimes being allowed to stay?
 
Well, my opinion is totally different from yours, and there are law abiding Hispanics who don't agree with you, and it doesn't insult me because like I have always stated, if Republicans were serious about illegals they would hit business and people who hire them, hard, and they just aren't going to do that, so this indicates to me that they just aren't serious about illegal immigrants. They can bully and bluster all they want, but they don't do what would be most effective.
WTF does that have to do with a straight up or down vote on sanctuary cities or aggravated felons re-entering and commiting more crimes?
This is a single issue vote on both counts :whoa:
 
That is a strange take on what happened, I don't think that is the intention of sanctuary cities, in fact I am sure it isn't.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...rm the nation's criminal justice system [/I]
 
That's what happened here. There is no way this guy should have been let out.

Yes, and the murder of Kate was very tragic, but I still side with the Democrats on the rights of sanctuary cities and the reasons for them.
 
that's the sanctuary city bill you refer to. Reid claims removing sanctuary would remove community policing ( my characterization).
It's at least an argument he puts forth. But still a vote on a stand alone bill should have happened
~~
I was referring to Kate's Law - here from your link-can you see any merit in Reid's words here?? does not this deserve a vote?

Cruz's bill, which he dubbed Kate's Law, would have increased from two years to five years the maximum prison term for an undocumented immigrant who re-entered the U.S. after being denied admission or deported. It also would have created a maximum 10-year prison term for any migrant who re-entered the U.S. illegally after being removed on three or more prior attempts.

"Kate should be alive today, but she isn't because the federal government failed her," Cruz said. "The time for politics is over. We should come together and protect the American people."

Reid said the bill "would enact unnecessary mandatory-minimum sentences that would cost billions and billions of new dollars, increase the prison population and siphon funding from state and local law enforcement." He said it also would undermine bipartisan efforts to reform the nation's criminal justice system


This is a knee jerk reaction to the murder of Kate, it would not have the effect that Cruz wishes and as Reid stated the cost would be ridiculous, and this from the Republican Cruz, how is he going to pay for it is what he would ask others?
 
This is a knee jerk reaction to the murder of Kate, it would not have the effect that Cruz wishes and as Reid stated the cost would be ridiculous, and this from the Republican Cruz, how is he going to pay for it is what he would ask others?
Oh Lord. why would it not have the effect if the murderer had been picked up earlier and in jail. That's knee jerk?

And why would the costs be "ridiculous?
do we have that many illegals running around with aggravated felonies who have re-entered? Is that not a problem then unto itself?
And none of this should even get a straight up and down vote? why not?
 
Oh Lord. why would it not have the effect if the murderer had been picked up earlier and in jail. That's knee jerk?

And why would the costs be "ridiculous?
do we have that many illegals running around with aggravated felonies who have re-entered? Is that not a problem then unto itself?
And none of this should even get a straight up and down vote? why not?

He wasn't a murderer at the time, he was wanted on a marijuana violation.
 
He wasn't a murderer at the time, he was wanted on a marijuana violation.
OK I could not find that. do you have a link I can find it? (dudes name or something)
But this criteria is now for aggravated felonies only..the rest of the questions stand.. primarily why not allow a vote?
If it's matter of costs..we have bigger problems..that is a LOT of aggravated felons running around who have re-entered.
 
OK I could not find that. do you have a link I can find it? (dudes name or something)
But this criteria is now for aggravated felonies only..the rest of the questions stand.. primarily why not allow a vote?
If it's matter of costs..we have bigger problems..that is a LOT of aggravated felons running around who have re-entered.

Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez
Less than three months after his fifth deportation, Sanchez was caught attempting to cross the border in Eagle Pass, Texas. He pleaded guilty to felony reentry; upon sentencing, a federal court recommended Sanchez be placed in "a federal medical facility as soon as possible."[SUP][20][/SUP]On March 26, 2015, at the request of the San Francisco Sheriff's Department, United States Bureau of Prisons (BOP) had turned Sanchez over to San Francisco authorities for an outstanding drug warrant.[SUP][22][/SUP] U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had issued a detainer for Sanchez requesting that he be kept in custody until immigration authorities could pick him up. As a sanctuary city, however, which limits cooperation with ICE only to cases where active charges against the immigrant are identified, San Francisco did not honor the detainer and released him, since they found no active warrant for his arrest.[SUP][23][/SUP] San Francisco officials transported Sanchez to San Francisco County Jail on March 26, 2015 to face a 20-year-old felony charge of selling and possessing marijuana after Sanchez completed his latest prison term in San Bernardino County for entering in the country without the proper documents.[SUP][16][/SUP] He was released from San Francisco County Jail on April 15, and had no outstanding warrants or judicial warrants, as confirmed by the San Francisco Sheriff's Department.[SUP][21]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Kathryn_Steinle

[/SUP]
 
pleaded guilty to felony re-entry
5 deportations !
has a detainer from ICE
no active warrant- but still a 20 year old warrant for sale and possession ( isn't that still a warrant?)
completed latest prison term in San Bernardino County for entering in the country without the proper documents
SF releases him any way? ( did I get them all?)

Oh. OK then. what's the big deal?
 
pleaded guilty to felony re-entry
5 deportations !
has a detainer from ICE
no active warrant- but still a 20 year old warrant for sale and possession ( isn't that still a warrant?)
completed latest prison term in San Bernardino County for entering in the country without the proper documents
SF releases him any way? ( did I get them all?)

Oh. OK then. what's the big deal?

Yes, he is a homeless druggie that they would deport and he would come back over the border, again, even after he served his ten years because jail is probably better than living on the streets.\
So, tell me, how does increasing their sentences stop this from reoccurring?
 
Yes, he is a homeless druggie that they would deport and he would come back over the border, again, even after he served his ten years because jail is probably better than living on the streets.\
So, tell me, how does increasing their sentences stop this from reoccurring?
build a fucking wall to stop this shit? That's how insane a situation this is.

from my understanding any police agency could pick him up just for re-entry and lock him up 5 years.just for being here.
Bypassing this sanctuary city nonsense too.
P.S. How does federal law not reign supreme with sanctuary cities??
 
build a fucking wall to stop this shit? That's how insane a situation this is.

from my understanding any police agency could pick him up just for re-entry and lock him up 5 years.just for being here.
Bypassing this sanctuary city nonsense too.
P.S. How does federal law not reign supreme with sanctuary cities??

You are a Trumpeteer, sorry, you know what I think of those guys.
 
Back
Top