It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump to Fox News: I may defund California as 'a weapon' to fight illegal immigration

page: 11
75
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 12:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: PlasticWizard
a reply to: Phage

If the local and states police aren't enforcing federal immigration laws and they receive federal funding, couldn't that funding be halted?


Law enforcement will not be touched I would think.
From the Executive Order.



(a) In furtherance of this policy, the Attorney General and the Secretary, in their discretion and to the extent consistent with law, shall ensure that jurisdictions that willfully refuse to comply with 8 U.S.C. 1373 (sanctuary jurisdictions) are not eligible to receive Federal grants, except as deemed necessary for law enforcement purposes by the Attorney General or the Secretary. The Secretary has the authority to designate, in his discretion and to the extent consistent with law, a jurisdiction as a sanctuary jurisdiction. The Attorney General shall take appropriate enforcement action against any entity that violates 8 U.S.C. 1373, or which has in effect a statute, policy, or practice that prevents or hinders the enforcement of Federal law.

edit on 6-2-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 01:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ripper777
a reply to: Profusion

I live in Los Angeles . . .


So do I.

I do not support Trump.

edit on 6-2-2017 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 01:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Annee





Trump makes a great slum-lord and corporate raider.


I want to say I agree with you if only to make it out that California would be the slum area.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 01:19 AM
link   
Yeah because stating Trump would make a great "Slum Lord" is just about as valid as saying you've lived or even experienced the slums and that you are lord at anything. Well Slum Lord judge has spoken; and you are still a snowflake. I think the biggest controversy of a Trump presidency is the controversy by the left to force the hand of any law abiding American citizen into a state where the democrat minority needs to be viewed as not complacent and incapable of tolerance. Thanks Obama. Jk Obama was cool.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 01:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: 3daysgone
a reply to: Annee





Trump makes a great slum-lord and corporate raider.


I want to say I agree with you if only to make it out that California would be the slum area.


What do you really know about California?



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 01:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Annee

This is an internet Forum for the Latin word designating congregation this is no place for your feminine questioning of peoples underlying culture or psychology please try to answer your own questions before asking 3daysgone what he really knows about California.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 01:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: BeneGesseritWitch
a reply to: Annee

This is an internet Forum for the Latin word designating congregation this is no place for your feminine questioning of peoples underlying culture or psychology please try to answer your own questions before asking 3daysgone what he really knows about California.


What a strange post.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 01:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: Annee

If you don't pay your bills, that can happen.
If you don't pay rent, or otherwise violate a rental agreement, a landlord can evict.
That's how the world works.



But they do pay their rent. In this analogy, rent is paid but the landlord just doesn't like who the tenants invite into their homes.


Well, by this same analogy, if the tenants move someone else in, the landlord has to agree to their being there and add them to the lease. And if the landlord doesn't want them there for whatever reason, he can simply say "nope." If you move someone in without his consent, then he can not only have them removed, he can evict the tenants too. At least that's how it's worked with every place I've ever rented.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 01:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: BeneGesseritWitch
a reply to: Annee

This is an internet Forum for the Latin word designating congregation this is no place for your feminine questioning of peoples underlying culture or psychology please try to answer your own questions before asking 3daysgone what he really knows about California.

What? The etymology for the word "congregation" is rooted in the Latin word "congregare", and still means the same as it originally did -- to flock together.

Where were you going with this anyway?



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 01:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Annee




What do you really know about California?


That I am glad I don't live there.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 02:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Nyiah

Well I had to quickly google it but Forum is old english derived from latin word meaning out of doors and as you stated bravely in all the tense of congregare is to flock together. By congregare (I'll use simple words to help you understand) like Annee did it has failed to even give an opposing or forum view of people of the same state it belongs to or I assume because it states to opposing views the proxy of what do they even know of california. So I believe that where I was going is democracy and understanding of words before cultural norms but hey yolo swag.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 02:20 AM
link   
a reply to: BeneGesseritWitch

Awesome word salad!



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 02:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

toss it Phage



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 02:36 AM
link   
ATS should know what kind of military installations are in Cali and that military even in the most corrupt of third world countries gets direct funding which trickles down into it's community. That Californians are even worried about federal cuts to its public sector is a shameful chapter in world history though all men and women are beautiful it is our differences that make up the foundation of beauty. If making the dream of having other countries adhere to laws and regulations; equality in the face of the law and confrontation in the face of corruption, or that patriotism only apply s if your side is winning then by all means keep on funding these states that ignore the tragedy of paying for borders that no one respects. But if something strikes you as odd that words and meanings don't mean what they used to well then you're a part of the past and this machine will keep on rolling without you.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 02:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

I'm in Calif,good majority here don't support sanc citys,and to be honest,what federal things do they do here anyway,enforce laws? FDA,EPA I really think we will exist,if taxes are withheld the US would automatically have about a 39% deficit,kind of think it will hurt them much more,I'm for it,I might want to go 4 wheeling,them feds won't be gettin paid so maybe not on duty



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Caver78




Compliance with the law is paramount, a country without laws devolves into anarchy.

Toward the latter, there are plenty of laws.
Toward the former, there were laws which prohibited blacks from marrying whites. There were laws which prohibited blacks from using the same restroom as whites. Was compliance paramount?


Apples and Oranges, but bonus points for tossing in a super volatile race item.

The cities breaking the law as Sanctuary cities can be seen as racist because it's not like they extend their open doors invitation to many white refugees now that you mention it. Altho the UK has no problem letting the Polish in for instance?

It really doesn't matter what your skin color is if you are a citizen of another country living here without having gone thru the US's system for either long term guest status or the lengthier application for citizenship.

Just like I can't just bust a move up into Canada, getting a job up there, paying taxes up there, without going thru the due process. Cause there are laws to entry. It wouldn't matter how much of a law abiding person I am. Canada would deport my butt. Rightfully so I might add.

Aside from that you made everyones point a page ago that Trump doesn't need a EO. The immigration laws are already in place.


edit on 6-2-2017 by Caver78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: avgguy
a reply to: Annee

I don't see a problem with defunding if they don't want to follow the law.


Trump makes a great slum-lord and corporate raider.


Somebody has to rent to the leftists in this country.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 05:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: Annee

Sanctuary cities is such a benign sounding term, it might have been a sanctuary for the illegal alien, but it sure as hell wasn't a sanctuary for a young woman walking with her father. CUT THE FUNDING.


The 32-year-old Steinle was walking with her father on San Francisco’s Pier 14 last July 1 when she was shot and killed by an illegal alien, Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, who had already been convicted of seven felonies and deported five times to Mexico.

www.breitbart.com...


I thought you people were pro state's rights. You are, up until the point the state doesn't want to do what the Emperor wants to do.

Immigration IS NOT a State right...but you knew that , right ? , NM



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 05:14 AM
link   
So....if California can ignore federal law and allow immigration outside the oversight of Uncle Sam, does that now mean that another state can choose to re-enact slavery and launch a new set of cotton plantations?

There is a reason that our union is federalized. It was settled, and constitutional amendments were put in place to codify it. Obviously, we can undo that. Im sure states like North Dakota, with its chains of low income towns, would LOVE to ignore the Americans With Disabilities Act. Retrofitting all those older busineses with ADA compliant rails and ramps is extraordinarily expensive.

Maybe Texas can let us start owning fully automatic rifles. No need to observe federal law anymore, right? Imagine how much money we could make in Texas as the armory of the south. Or how quickly New Mexico can rebuild its economy by creating a foreign trade deal with Columbia and importing their prized exports. If Uncle Sam isn't in charge of immigration, then why sould they have a monopoly on creating foreign trade deals?



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 05:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: PlasticWizard
a reply to: Phage

You tell me man, I'm just asking the questions. Didn't see it covered in the thread. Hopefully someone chimes in that knows if there is a law that ties funding to local law enforcement to federal immigration laws.


Back on page 7 of this thread:
8 U.S. Code § 1373 - Communication between government agencies and the Immigration and Naturalization Service

(a) In general

Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal, State, or local law, a Federal, State, or local government entity or official may not prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual.
(b) Additional authority of government entities Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal, State, or local law, no person or agency may prohibit, or in any way restrict, a Federal, State, or local government entity from doing any of the following with respect to information regarding the immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual:
(1) Sending such information to, or requesting or receiving such information from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
(2) Maintaining such information.
(3) Exchanging such information with any other Federal, State, or local government entity.
(c) Obligation to respond to inquiries

The Immigration and Naturalization Service shall respond to an inquiry by a Federal, State, or local government agency, seeking to verify or ascertain the citizenship or immigration status of any individual within the jurisdiction of the agency for any purpose authorized by law, by providing the requested verification or status information.


OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS GUIDANCE REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH 8 U.S.C. 1373

Your personnel must be informed that notwithstanding any state or local policies to the
contrary, federal law does not allow any government entity or official to prohibit the sending
or receiving of information about an individual’s
citizenship or immigration status with any
federal, state or local government entity and officials.

May a state make a subgrant to a city that the state knows to be violating an applicable
law or regulation (e.g. Section 1373), or a programmatic requirement?

A. No. A JAG grantee is required to assure and certify compliance with all applicable
federal statues, including Section 1373, as well as all applicable federal regulations, policies,
guidelines and requirements. This requirement passes through to any subgrants that may be
made and to any subgranteees that receive funds under the grant.
...
A grantee is responsible to the federal government for the duration of the award. As the
primary recipient of the award, the grantee is responsible for ensuring that subgrantees
assure and certify compliance with federal program and grant requirements, laws, or regulations
(e.g. Section 1373).
If a grantee or subgrantee has policies or practices in effect that violate
Section 1373, the grantee or subgrantee will be given a reasonable amount of time to remedy
or clarify such policies to ensure compliance with applicable law. Failure to remedy any
violations could result in the withholding of grant funds or ineligibility for future OJP grants
or subgrants, or other administrative,
civil, or criminal penalties, as appropriate.


OFFICE OF JUSTICE PR OGRAMS ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE RE GARDING COMPLIANCE WITH 8 U . S . C . § 1373

Authorizing legislation for the Byrne/JAG grant program requires that all grant applicants certify
compliance both with the provisions of that authorizing legislation and all other applicable
federal laws. The Office of Justice Programs has determined that 8 U.S.C.§ 1373
(Section 1373) is an applicable federal law under the Byrne/JAG authorizing legislation. Therefore, all
Byrne/JAG grant applicants must certify compliance with all applicable federal laws, including
Section 1373, as part of the Byrne/JAG
grant application process.



new topics

top topics



 
75
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join