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.

 

DHS laying groundwork to arrest sanctuary city leaders..and eventually governors?

page: 2
45
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 02:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: SlapMonkey

originally posted by: olaru12
I thought it was the conservative republicans that were all about "states rights"


Key word being "rights."

I'm quite certain that states do not have the "right" to actively fight federal immigration laws and knowingly and assertively legislate to enable the breaking of such laws.

It goes with marijuana, too--even though states are passing laws legalizing it, and so far the DOJ has turned a blind eye, that may not be the way that it is for much longer, and the state laws will be null and void (and still are at a federal level).

This is a fine-line issue, though, concerning federal ability to tell states what to do, and I'll be watching this issue closely. Like I noted in my other comment, though--it's not that they're passively unwilling to do the job of the federal government, it's about them purposefully legislating BECAUSE they want to spite the laws of the federal government. It's one thing to have a sanctuary-state spirit, it's another to make it official legislation.


I disagree. The end result is the same.

In say the case with Texas they are out right lieing to the public..

In California they are not.

The reality is illegals are working under the shadows helping business owners cheat by the millions in both states. Forcing tax payers to pay for welfare to support the low wages.




posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 02:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: TobyFlenderson
a reply to: matafuchs

Bullying and using the full power of the federal gov't to lock people up in this circumstance would be an overwhelming abuse of power.


I agree on just about everything you said, but I disagree on this last part.

It's abuse of power for these mayors and governors to jeopardize national security and subvert the laws to pander to their voter base.

Equally, it would be dereliction of duty for DHS not to take legal action against these individuals.



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 02:23 PM
link   
a reply to: TobyFlenderson

You are very correct also. That was why when I read this I wanted to know how other felt and the MJ like I thought is a common recurrence in responses. However, what I see is who do the states back? The immigrants who are draining the money or the growers who are bringing billions in revenue?

Now, the state many do not discuss is NY, it's sanctuary cities and their push for a Sanctuary state. That would be a showdown for the ages...in Trumps backyard no less.



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 02:23 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Its the duty of the federal government to enforce immigration. If local LEO come across them in the course of their normal work, they should detain them. But the police are verboten when it comes to doing immigration raids on job sites.

The federal government owns it, completely. They don't really have many duties (they just pretend like they do). But the border is 100% Uncle Sam



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 02:24 PM
link   
a reply to: WarPig1939

I agree and disagree.

The streets are also filled with lazy people on fake disability and young folks living with their parents with no building skills to fuel boom towns.

But those of us carpenters who actually want to earn a living would appreciate leveling the field by making actual visas for labor voids.



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 02:26 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I agree. I am just saying just because captain d bag and former attorney general Abbott says he is tough doesn't mean crap.



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 02:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
The one thing I can say is asserting immigration law is the duty of the federal government.


If I was a betting man, I'd lay money on both this immigration sanctuary flap and the MJ issue being ruled over by the SCOTUS in the not too distant future. SCOTUS will almost certainly (like 99.99999% certainly) rule in favor of the federal government on immigration as it is Constitutionally mandated that the feds are in full control of that one. The MJ issue, however, may end up setting some precedents... The argument can certainly be made that the feds don't have any mandate to override the states where MJ is concerned, furthermore, we aren't too many more legal states away from Congress having the numbers to simply make it federally legal, which could happen.



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 02:27 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

H1B Visas is a also an avenue although the process has been more stringent.



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 02:27 PM
link   
delete post
edit on 16-1-2018 by WarPig1939 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 02:27 PM
link   
double post delete
edit on 16-1-2018 by WarPig1939 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 02:28 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Its all politics. Don't get too tough and ostracize too many voters.
Texas politics is as slimey as any i've seen. The worst part is, our slime buckets do their nonsense with a smile and a drawl. Like they enjoy screwing us over, and want to talk about it slowly.



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 02:29 PM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey


I'm quite certain that states do not have the "right" to actively fight federal immigration laws and knowingly and assertively legislate to enable the breaking of such laws.


Have you read the law in question? Not a debate, simply asking if you've read the bill. I haven't read the bill itself, but the articles I've seen on it have mentioned that there's something 800 crimes where local and state are still obligated to work with the Feds on. The only real change I've been able to find is that locals can't ask about immigration status at all now, and local detention facilities are barred from being used as federal holding facilities.

I think the biggest issue, that I've found, is that the state AG is supposed to come up with a plan to make "safe zones" where illegals are supposed to be protected from immigration enforcement, and that those safe zones are supposed to include courthouses and local/state offices.

The courthouse thing is particularly galling. "No, we the state are telling you the Feds that you may not enforce your laws in or around this FREAKING SYMBOL OF THE LAW."
edit on 16-1-2018 by Shamrock6 because: can't leave my quotes open, dammit



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 02:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12
I thought it was the conservative republicans that were all about "states rights"


It's now a state's rights issue?

How come it wasn't when Arizona tried passing a state level version of Federal immigration provisions?



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 02:31 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

At least Perry didn't pretend he was some kind of Alex Jones rebel. Greg is such a loser. Can't stand him.

But I don't live there anymore so I can't complain too much.



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

This is a really interesting article about Calexit, it is about the case for California seceding the US Gov.

In the article it brags about how a large portion of agriculture comes from Cal. however in light of their ongoing tragedies from drought, water crisis, energy crisis, mudslides and erosion, wildfires and the potential for still the largest EQ in Americas history, and not to forget the ever-expanding welfare state as well as home to one of the worlds largest homeless populations, their greed about being a major contributor to AG has begun to take a back seat to their ability to deliver as they move from tragedy to tragedy.

Bottomline is that they really dont want to mess with their only Sugar Daddy. As much as the politicians pretend they are on the side of the people, they will jump ship when they have to rely upon California to support itself. If that happens Post- open border, the so-called politicians will sell short to Mexico and give the entire state to them.
www.businessinsider.com...
edit on pm131pmTue, 16 Jan 2018 14:36:04 -0600 by antar because: (no reason given)

edit on pm131pmTue, 16 Jan 2018 14:41:04 -0600 by antar because: Thought the last 8 years gave them plenty of time to get a green card or start the process to be legal...



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: WarPig1939

True. I however don't blame the illegals as much as I do the employers and politicians. It isn't the illegals fault I opened 5 gallon drywall buckets to do a touch up and found makeshift toilets. It's the scumbags who won't get a Porta John and wont hire at least legal immigrants with rights.

The illegals come to work more than anything else regardless of the spin. The politicians with employers allowed it so who is really to blame?

Not miguel in my opinion regardless of how annoyed I got working in the boarder states.
edit on 16-1-2018 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 02:37 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

I for one would like to be there,and help tar and feather run him out of town on a rail,the crooked senators,and their followers



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 02:39 PM
link   
What a dog and pony show. Build the wall, round up illegals , deport aliens.
its all a sham to get you to think they are gonna get you back 'er jobs.

What a joke. The mega corporations need that slave labor to maximize profits, they will never allow them to be deported from their mega farm factories.



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 02:41 PM
link   
States' Rights as long as they're Constitutional.

This illegal immigration protection is not Constitutional.

Lots of assbackwardness.




posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 02:46 PM
link   
The New California declaration might shake things up too. Looks like a majority of the state is about to rebel openly.







 
45
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join