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.

 

Chicago Sues Justice Department Over Efforts to Deny Funding to Sanctuary Cities

page: 1
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 02:01 PM
link   
Chicago has dropped a lawsuit in the Federal Court system over the Trump Admin's "Sanctuary City" policies.

The Big City" wants to make it known they are and always will be a Sanctuary haven.

And of course, it's about "Money" and "Assistance".

AG Jeff Sessions is a named "defendant".


Chicago Sues Justice Department Over Efforts to Deny Funding to Sanctuary Cities

"The City of Chicago will continue to stand up to President Trump," Mayor Rahm Emanuel said in a statement

Mayor Rahm Emanuel announced Sunday that the City of Chicago will file a federal lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice over efforts to block funding to sanctuary cities.

"Chicago will not be blackmailed into changing our values, and we are and will remain a welcoming city," Emanuel said in a released statement.
"The federal government should be working with cities to provide necessary resources to improve public safety, not concocting new schemes to reduce our crime fighting resources," he continued. "The City of Chicago will continue to stand up to President Trump and his Justice Department to ensure that their misguided policies do not threaten the safety of our residents."



2nd "opinions".....


Crime-ridden Chicago sues DOJ over sanctuary cities

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel sued the Trump administration Monday over its threat to withhold funds from sanctuary cities, prompting one official to charge Emanuel is more concerned about protecting illegal immigrants than legal residents of his beleaguered city.

The showdown over so-called sanctuary cities has been heating up in recent months as some local governments have refused to work with federal immigration authorities. Monday's 46-page suit, filed inU.SD. District Court for the Northern District of Ilinois, named Attorney General Jeff Sessions as the defendant.

Emanuel argues that the Justice Department wants to slap unfair conditions on a long-running federal crime prevention grant, the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant.



+6 more 
posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 02:12 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Aiding a criminal is illegal. The mayor needs to be arrested for aiding criminals. Illegal is illegal. Mayors of all sanctuary cities should be arrested for aiding illegals.



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 02:13 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

The safety of Chicago has little to do with illegal immigrants and more to do with its actual residents.
Rahm lives in a rose colored glass tower.



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 02:13 PM
link   
If you are getting money from the feds to fight crime and then dont cooperate with fighting the crimes then you don't get that money anymore.....simple.
If they want federal money just turn over the illegal people who are caught doing crime , why would you want to keep them in your city anyway?



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 02:14 PM
link   

slap unfair conditions on a long-running federal crime prevention grant, the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant.


Certainly seems to be money well spent in Chicago, amirite?

Rahm's probably just upset that there'll be less money for the Haves to take from the Havenots if that grant goes away.



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Back when the Feds mandated a nationwide 55 mph speed limit, they did so under threat of witholding federal highway funding for states that refused to comply.
I don't remember any lawsuits being filed over that.



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 03:38 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

So, they are suing because they don't like the repercussions for breaking Federal Law? This is a LOL lawsuit and should be thrown out ASAP.



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 06:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: xuenchen

So, they are suing because they don't like the repercussions for breaking Federal Law? This is a LOL lawsuit and should be thrown out ASAP.


Not a fan of states rights I see.



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 06:21 PM
link   
The Supreme Court will back the Justice Department and all sanctuary cities will lose.

In Arizona v. United States the Supreme Court ruled that immigration is federal law and states or cities may not pursue policies that undermine federal law.”



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 06:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: xuenchen

So, they are suing because they don't like the repercussions for breaking Federal Law? This is a LOL lawsuit and should be thrown out ASAP.


Not a fan of states rights I see.


So Chicago is now its own state? I seem to have missed when that happened, or have we stopped even pretending that any of the rest of the state of Illinois even matters and Chicago is basically its own little city-state arrangement now?



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 06:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: ANNED
The Supreme Court will back the Justice Department and all sanctuary cities will lose.

In Arizona v. United States the Supreme Court ruled that immigration is federal law and states or cities may not pursue policies that undermine federal law.”


In a sane world, that should be a the way it goes.



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 06:26 PM
link   
a reply to: ANNED

Not enforcing something isn't really the same as undermining it.



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

In this case it would be.



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 06:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: ANNED

Not enforcing something isn't really the same as undermining it.


Did you really just post that as a response? I did a double take when I read it. When you allow people to break a law without repercussion, you are undermining the law.



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 06:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: xuenchen

So, they are suing because they don't like the repercussions for breaking Federal Law? This is a LOL lawsuit and should be thrown out ASAP.


Not a fan of states rights I see.


Well Senator, Congress needs to change the laws.




posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 07:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Khaleesi

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: ANNED

Not enforcing something isn't really the same as undermining it.


Did you really just post that as a response? I did a double take when I read it. When you allow people to break a law without repercussion, you are undermining the law.


Undermining is doing something to help facilitate breaking it.

Not enforcing the law (provided you're being neutral about it, and not actally helping them) isn't undermining it.

For example, if Chicago simply doesn't enforce immigration law, then they're not undermining it. The feds will get upset, but they can't really force compliance (and even if they could, they can't force competence... maybe Chicago is just bad at it).

On the other hand, if Chicago starts willingly helping people get to their city illegally, now they're undermining the law, and in a whole boat load of legal trouble.



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 07:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
So Chicago is now its own state? I seem to have missed when that happened, or have we stopped even pretending that any of the rest of the state of Illinois even matters and Chicago is basically its own little city-state arrangement now?


Not a fan of city rights? Cities can choose what they teach kids, and how they're brought up as citizens... but not able to choose when something hurts their community?



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 07:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Khaleesi

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: ANNED

Not enforcing something isn't really the same as undermining it.


Did you really just post that as a response? I did a double take when I read it. When you allow people to break a law without repercussion, you are undermining the law.


Undermining is doing something to help facilitate breaking it.

Not enforcing the law (provided you're being neutral about it, and not actally helping them) isn't undermining it.

For example, if Chicago simply doesn't enforce immigration law, then they're not undermining it. The feds will get upset, but they can't really force compliance (and even if they could, they can't force competence... maybe Chicago is just bad at it).

On the other hand, if Chicago starts willingly helping people get to their city illegally, now they're undermining the law, and in a whole boat load of legal trouble.


You facilitate breaking a law by not enforcing it. If people know you will not enforce a law they are more likely/willing to break it. Geez, it is not hard to figure out.



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 08:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

I am a huge fan of states rights. And as a resident of southern Illinois, I feel I must educate you that ( as much as they may think they run things ) Chicago is not its own state. It is a petulant child city. Has an only child complex, and daddy just took away its favorite toy



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 08:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: ketsuko
So Chicago is now its own state? I seem to have missed when that happened, or have we stopped even pretending that any of the rest of the state of Illinois even matters and Chicago is basically its own little city-state arrangement now?


Not a fan of city rights? Cities can choose what they teach kids, and how they're brought up as citizens... but not able to choose when something hurts their community?


They can? Really?

Ever heard of Common Core? I thought it was adopted to prevent too much variance in local control of education. After all, you can't trust that some places won't teach stupid stuff to kids ... like Chicago.




top topics



 
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join