'Sanctuary' Means Career Criminals Can Run and Hide

anatta

100% recycled karma
he says he would focus on 2 million or more undocumented immigrants with criminal histories. That is, his focus now is on mainstream ideas that the news media can brand as extreme only at the peril of their credibility.

Trump told "60 Minutes" he wants to "get the people that are criminals and have criminal records, gang members, drug dealers. We have a lot of these people; probably 2 million, it could even be 3 million. We are getting them out of the country or we are going to incarcerate."
It's hard to call that position "extreme" when it lines up with President Obama's direction to Immigration and Customs Enforcement to focus on removing undocumented immigrants with serious criminal records. Under Obama, ICE's Priority Enforcement Program has targeted convicted criminals who threaten public safety or national security.

The big difference, I suspect, will be that Trump means it when he says he will deport "criminal aliens," and Obama didn't really mean it. After all, if Obama truly believed in deporting criminal aliens, he would have challenged sanctuary cities like San Francisco that protected repeat offenders from ICE.

In 2010, Obama's Department of Justice sued Arizona after lawmakers passed a law to allow local law enforcement to check the immigration status of those suspected of breaking state laws. A Department of Justice brief claimed "a state may not establish its own immigration policy or enforce state laws in a manner that interferes with the federal immigration laws."

But the Obama administration failed to challenge a a 2013 San Francisco ordinance that protected Juan Francisco Lopez Sanchez from being turned over to ICE. Lopez Sanchez had been convicted of seven felonies and deported five times when San Francisco District Attorney George Gascón dropped a decades-old marijuana charge and then-Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi released Lopez Sanchez rather than hand him over to ICE, as ICE requested. Weeks later, authorities charged the Mexican national for the shooting death of city resident Kate Steinle. Lopez Sanchez has pleaded not guilty.

Trump is likely to borrow from past legislation introduced by Sen. David Vitter, R-La., to pull federal funding from sanctuary cities because, Vitter argues, "sanctuary cities will continue to exist until there are tangible penalties in place

What we don't know is if Trump will try to be as tough on sanctuary cities that simply shield undocumented crime victims from being reported to ICE -- which seems reasonable -- as he should be on San Francisco, with its extreme stance on defending career criminals who are in the country illegally. California's state law also shields repeat offenders from ICE. The TRUST Act policy sends a message that people can live in America illegally and continue to break laws without having to face the consequences.

The problem for the next president: If repeat offenders figure they can evade deportation by fleeing to "social justice" havens, then it will be harder for immigration officials to target the worst threats to public safety.

There is also a principle involved here. "As a lawyer for 60 years and a judge for 10," Superior Court Judge Quentin Kopp recently told me, "I'm a believer in the law. That's why I don't understand accepting, much less rewarding, disregard of the law." That's a pretty basic belief. If the cream of Washington understood that contract, then perhaps Donald Trump would not be president-elect
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...career_criminals_can_run_and_hide_132400.html
 
he says he would focus on 2 million or more undocumented immigrants with criminal histories. That is, his focus now is on mainstream ideas that the news media can brand as extreme only at the peril of their credibility.

Trump told "60 Minutes" he wants to "get the people that are criminals and have criminal records, gang members, drug dealers. We have a lot of these people; probably 2 million, it could even be 3 million. We are getting them out of the country or we are going to incarcerate."
It's hard to call that position "extreme" when it lines up with President Obama's direction to Immigration and Customs Enforcement to focus on removing undocumented immigrants with serious criminal records. Under Obama, ICE's Priority Enforcement Program has targeted convicted criminals who threaten public safety or national security.

The big difference, I suspect, will be that Trump means it when he says he will deport "criminal aliens," and Obama didn't really mean it. After all, if Obama truly believed in deporting criminal aliens, he would have challenged sanctuary cities like San Francisco that protected repeat offenders from ICE.

In 2010, Obama's Department of Justice sued Arizona after lawmakers passed a law to allow local law enforcement to check the immigration status of those suspected of breaking state laws. A Department of Justice brief claimed "a state may not establish its own immigration policy or enforce state laws in a manner that interferes with the federal immigration laws."

But the Obama administration failed to challenge a a 2013 San Francisco ordinance that protected Juan Francisco Lopez Sanchez from being turned over to ICE. Lopez Sanchez had been convicted of seven felonies and deported five times when San Francisco District Attorney George Gascón dropped a decades-old marijuana charge and then-Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi released Lopez Sanchez rather than hand him over to ICE, as ICE requested. Weeks later, authorities charged the Mexican national for the shooting death of city resident Kate Steinle. Lopez Sanchez has pleaded not guilty.

Trump is likely to borrow from past legislation introduced by Sen. David Vitter, R-La., to pull federal funding from sanctuary cities because, Vitter argues, "sanctuary cities will continue to exist until there are tangible penalties in place

What we don't know is if Trump will try to be as tough on sanctuary cities that simply shield undocumented crime victims from being reported to ICE -- which seems reasonable -- as he should be on San Francisco, with its extreme stance on defending career criminals who are in the country illegally. California's state law also shields repeat offenders from ICE. The TRUST Act policy sends a message that people can live in America illegally and continue to break laws without having to face the consequences.

The problem for the next president: If repeat offenders figure they can evade deportation by fleeing to "social justice" havens, then it will be harder for immigration officials to target the worst threats to public safety.

There is also a principle involved here. "As a lawyer for 60 years and a judge for 10," Superior Court Judge Quentin Kopp recently told me, "I'm a believer in the law. That's why I don't understand accepting, much less rewarding, disregard of the law." That's a pretty basic belief. If the cream of Washington understood that contract, then perhaps Donald Trump would not be president-elect
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...career_criminals_can_run_and_hide_132400.html

Not sure what you mean. Immigration is Only a federal problem, not a State or City problem, since 1808.
 
Rune is a fucking dolt -threadban worthy since he's clueless as always.
. as far as "Obama deported more then Bush" that includes just the seizures at the borders -which Bush categorized separately.

But this is NOT ABOUT THE BORDER. It's about sanctuary cities -which SHELTER even criminal illegals..
The new guy "daniel..."at least seems to get that..

No worries. soon this abomination to federalism will end
 
Rune is a fucking dolt -threadban worthy since he's clueless as always.
. as far as "Obama deported more then Bush" that includes just the seizures at the borders -which Bush categorized separately.

But this is NOT ABOUT THE BORDER. It's about sanctuary cities -which SHELTER even criminal illegals..
The new guy "daniel..."at least seems to get that..

No worries. soon this abomination to federalism will end

we dont even need to cut funding to them if thats politically bad. Let the sanctuary cities advertise that they will harbor all illegals so the illegals go there. They only have so many jobs available so the influx of new illegals will take the jobs of the poorer city dwellers. Eventually the entire thing will collapse under its own wieght and their own voters will demand that they hand over the illegals. We just have to make sure they keep screaming they will protect illegals at the top of their lungs so all illegals are drawn to them.
 
Rune is a fucking dolt -threadban worthy since he's clueless as always.
. as far as "Obama deported more then Bush" that includes just the seizures at the borders -which Bush categorized separately.

But this is NOT ABOUT THE BORDER. It's about sanctuary cities -which SHELTER even criminal illegals..
The new guy "daniel..."at least seems to get that..

No worries. soon this abomination to federalism will end
Why do you put up with the twat?
he says he would focus on 2 million or more undocumented immigrants with criminal histories. That is, his focus now is on mainstream ideas that the news media can brand as extreme only at the peril of their credibility.

Trump told "60 Minutes" he wants to "get the people that are criminals and have criminal records, gang members, drug dealers. We have a lot of these people; probably 2 million, it could even be 3 million. We are getting them out of the country or we are going to incarcerate."
It's hard to call that position "extreme" when it lines up with President Obama's direction to Immigration and Customs Enforcement to focus on removing undocumented immigrants with serious criminal records. Under Obama, ICE's Priority Enforcement Program has targeted convicted criminals who threaten public safety or national security.

The big difference, I suspect, will be that Trump means it when he says he will deport "criminal aliens," and Obama didn't really mean it. After all, if Obama truly believed in deporting criminal aliens, he would have challenged sanctuary cities like San Francisco that protected repeat offenders from ICE.

In 2010, Obama's Department of Justice sued Arizona after lawmakers passed a law to allow local law enforcement to check the immigration status of those suspected of breaking state laws. A Department of Justice brief claimed "a state may not establish its own immigration policy or enforce state laws in a manner that interferes with the federal immigration laws."

But the Obama administration failed to challenge a a 2013 San Francisco ordinance that protected Juan Francisco Lopez Sanchez from being turned over to ICE. Lopez Sanchez had been convicted of seven felonies and deported five times when San Francisco District Attorney George Gascón dropped a decades-old marijuana charge and then-Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi released Lopez Sanchez rather than hand him over to ICE, as ICE requested. Weeks later, authorities charged the Mexican national for the shooting death of city resident Kate Steinle. Lopez Sanchez has pleaded not guilty.

Trump is likely to borrow from past legislation introduced by Sen. David Vitter, R-La., to pull federal funding from sanctuary cities because, Vitter argues, "sanctuary cities will continue to exist until there are tangible penalties in place

What we don't know is if Trump will try to be as tough on sanctuary cities that simply shield undocumented crime victims from being reported to ICE -- which seems reasonable -- as he should be on San Francisco, with its extreme stance on defending career criminals who are in the country illegally. California's state law also shields repeat offenders from ICE. The TRUST Act policy sends a message that people can live in America illegally and continue to break laws without having to face the consequences.

The problem for the next president: If repeat offenders figure they can evade deportation by fleeing to "social justice" havens, then it will be harder for immigration officials to target the worst threats to public safety.

There is also a principle involved here. "As a lawyer for 60 years and a judge for 10," Superior Court Judge Quentin Kopp recently told me, "I'm a believer in the law. That's why I don't understand accepting, much less rewarding, disregard of the law." That's a pretty basic belief. If the cream of Washington understood that contract, then perhaps Donald Trump would not be president-elect
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...career_criminals_can_run_and_hide_132400.html


Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
 
What problem? Immigration is Only a federal problem, not a State or City problem, since 1808.

That's it, stay tone deaf lol. People who are affected by the problems with immigration, and they are myriad, vote in elections.

Ignore them at your electoral peril.
 
This is why the Dems are in such opposition to Sessions. The attorney general and homeland security can undo Obamas illegal actions on illegal immigration
 
Rune is a fucking dolt -threadban worthy since he's clueless as always.
. as far as "Obama deported more then Bush" that includes just the seizures at the borders -which Bush categorized separately.

But this is NOT ABOUT THE BORDER. It's about sanctuary cities -which SHELTER even criminal illegals..
The new guy "daniel..."at least seems to get that..

No worries. soon this abomination to federalism will end

Sure Trump will. You fuckers got conned.
 
we dont even need to cut funding to them if thats politically bad. Let the sanctuary cities advertise that they will harbor all illegals so the illegals go there. They only have so many jobs available so the influx of new illegals will take the jobs of the poorer city dwellers. Eventually the entire thing will collapse under its own wieght and their own voters will demand that they hand over the illegals. We just have to make sure they keep screaming they will protect illegals at the top of their lungs so all illegals are drawn to them.

Only the fantastical right wing, has nothing but repeal or complaints, instead of better solutions at lower cost.

A market friendly work visa will solve our capital problems.
 
No worries. soon this abomination to federalism will end
How's that mate?
What's the plan ?[/QUOTE]

Well twatanna how are you going to end state sovereignity?

You have the balls to call me stupid .
LMFAO @TWATANNA
 
Back
Top