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.

 

Sanctuary cities, are they above the law?

page: 3
25
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 11 2019 @ 03:31 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

You didn't read my post - did you?

:-)

If a police officer encounters someone walking down the street who turns out to be undocumented, they cannot arrest that person because that person has not committed a crime (ICE, however, can).

So, do you understand now what a sanctuary city is?




posted on Dec, 11 2019 @ 03:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Spiramirabilis

Sorry, I read it.



Here’s where we get to important legal point #1: being undocumented is not a crime. It’s a civil violation


I just sourced and proved it is a crime.

Section 287(g) Immigration and Nationality Act allows for police to detain an illegal for 48 hours. The crap you posted is all lies.

Section 287(g) of the INA allows the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to enter into formal written agreements (Memoranda of Agreement or MOAs) with state or local police departments and deputize selected state and local law enforcement officers to perform the functions of federal immigration agents.

www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org...



posted on Dec, 11 2019 @ 04:00 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

From the ACLU:


Is the fact of being present in the United States in violation of the immigration laws a crime?

No. The act of being present in the United States in violation of the immigration laws is not, standing alone, a crime. While federal immigration law does criminalize some actions that may be related to undocumented presence in the United States, undocumented presence alone is not a violation of federal criminal law. Thus, many believe that the term “illegal alien,” which may suggest a criminal violation, is inaccurate or misleading.

Entering the United States without being inspected and admitted, i.e., illegal entry, is a misdemeanor or can be a felony, depending on the circumstances. 8 U.S.C. § 1325. But many undocumented immigrants do not enter the United States illegally. They enter legally but overstay, work without authorization, drop out of school or violate the conditions of their visas in some other way. Current estimates are that approximately 45% of undocumented immigrants did not enter illegally.



Didn’t Congress refuse to make undocumented presence a federal crime?

Yes. One of the most controversial provisions of H.R. 4437, the “Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005,” or “Sensenbrenner bill,” would have made simply being undocumented in the United States a felony. Although passed by the House of Representatives, the bill was rejected by the Senate after massive street demonstrations around the nation and sharp criticism of the provision criminalizing undocumented presence. Senator Harry Reid (D-Nev.) attacked the bill as “mak[ing] criminals out of and demoniz[ing] a lot of hard-working people who are just trying to provide for their families.”



Are undocumented immigrants “criminal aliens” under federal law?

No. Despite the anti-immigrant rhetoric, “criminal alien” is not a legal term and undocumented immigrants are not “criminal aliens” under federal law.The term “criminal alien” is not defined anywhere in the federal Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). To the extent it appears at all in the INA, it is used in the subject heading of several provisions that describe documented and undocumented immigrants who have been convicted of criminal offenses (after a trial or guilty plea) that are designated as “aggravated felonies” or as “crimes involving moral turpitude.” See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1226, 1228, 1252. A conviction of such a crime may subject an immigrant to removal from the United States, even if she is a lawful permanent resident. In contrast, immigrants who are undocumented but have not been convicted of any crime are not referred to as “criminal aliens” under the immigration laws.


Obviously - there are opposing views. Sanctuary cities violate the law to make sure that the laws are upheld

Life is tricky like that

edit on 12/11/2019 by Spiramirabilis because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2019 @ 04:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Spiramirabilis

I don't care what the ACLU says, I quoted the actual law. Coming under a tourist visa and overstaying is a popular way to come here illegally and falls under the law I already quoted. You can cover your eyes all you want, being in he country illegally without any other crime committed can be punishable up to 6 months, and police can detain on behalf of ICE.

Already sourced and quoted actual laws.



posted on Dec, 11 2019 @ 04:23 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Not exactly a nuanced position - but it seems that's all I'm going to get from you

I understand how complicated this situation is. It boils down to tolerance vs. intolerance. You want to claim that it's only about the law, but in that case - so will I



¡viva los ciudades santuarios! I have a deep seated love for virtuous renegades



posted on Dec, 11 2019 @ 04:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Spiramirabilis

ACLU position = there are SOME circumstances where being illegal is not punishable as a criminal offense therefore being illegal is not a criminal offense.

It's like saying because some people who kill another do it in self defense no people who kill others are criminals.

It's a lie. Those who do not deserve a criminal prosecution won't get one, those who do should.

Do you think people here illegally who fall under the criminal category should be above the law? Do Sanctuary cities help shelter them?
edit on 11-12-2019 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2019 @ 04:52 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04



Do you think people here illegally who fall under the criminal category should be above the law?

I don't believe anybody should be above the law - so long as the law is just


Do Sanctuary cities help shelter them?

No doubt there are criminals being protected in these situations. It's unfortunate - but not as unfortunate as treating a much larger number of innocent people as criminals

If there were a perfect solution you and I wouldn't be having this conversation

Having said that - there are plenty of people who commit heinous crimes who are citizens. Life is messy

I see us all as humans first. Sorry about the bleeding heart and all

I'm not for aiding and abetting a criminal police state. Even when they're just following orders



posted on Dec, 11 2019 @ 04:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Spiramirabilis

So you pick and choose what laws you follow. You need say no more, you protect criminals.



posted on Dec, 11 2019 @ 04:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Spiramirabilis

so you are good with ignoring laws that you feel aren't fair?



posted on Dec, 11 2019 @ 04:55 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

If that's how you choose to read what I said - so be it



posted on Dec, 11 2019 @ 04:55 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude



so you are good with ignoring laws that you feel aren't fair?


Would you hand over a Jew to the Nazis?


edit on 12/11/2019 by Spiramirabilis because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2019 @ 05:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Not exactly a nuanced position - but it seems that's all I'm going to get from you

I understand how complicated this situation is. It boils down to tolerance vs. intolerance. You want to claim that it's only about the law, but in that case - so will I



¡viva los ciudades santuarios! I have a deep seated love for virtuous renegades


If you think a law is unfair, you change the law, you don't just ignore it. Every person who crosses the border illegally, isn't an asylum seeker. Only the one's who claim asylum are. And in order to cross the border where no border crossing exists, a US law was broken.

If you are OK with ignoring the laws you feel are unfair, I can understand that, but to pretend you are some virtuous saint because of that is wrong. At least be honest with yourself. The rest already know.



posted on Dec, 11 2019 @ 05:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: network dude



so you are good with ignoring laws that you feel aren't fair?


Would you hand over a Jew to the Nazis?



If I didn't, would I be breaking the law?



posted on Dec, 11 2019 @ 05:03 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude




If I didn't, would I be breaking the law?


You know the answer to that question. Please don't chicken out



posted on Dec, 11 2019 @ 05:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Spiramirabilis

Look, I get that you enter these threads to win, you feel the need to be superior, like the rest of us. But in this case, the left railed on and on about how important the law is today. Then I mentioned how ironic that is, knowing that with regard to immigration, the left cares little for the law, and much more about feelz.

You can either admit to that, or continue to evade the topic and pretend to be on a pedestal. You choose.



posted on Dec, 11 2019 @ 05:06 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude




If you are OK with ignoring the laws you feel are unfair, I can understand that, but to pretend you are some virtuous saint because of that is wrong. At least be honest with yourself. The rest already know.

A personal attack?

I am what I am - I pretend nothing. I stand by my position - though I can see it makes you uncomfortable



posted on Dec, 11 2019 @ 05:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: network dude




If I didn't, would I be breaking the law?


You know the answer to that question. Please don't chicken out


I would not, but I would be painfully aware of the law I was breaking, and when I was next to a Jewish father in a concentration camp for breaking the law, I would know exactly why I was there.



posted on Dec, 11 2019 @ 05:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Spiramirabilis

Look, I get that you enter these threads to win, you feel the need to be superior, like the rest of us. But in this case, the left railed on and on about how important the law is today. Then I mentioned how ironic that is, knowing that with regard to immigration, the left cares little for the law, and much more about feelz.

You can either admit to that, or continue to evade the topic and pretend to be on a pedestal. You choose.


I am evading nothing - you are

And what is it exactly that I want to win?



This is all about your feels. I'm comfortable with my position. If you're afraid to answer a hard question - that's on you

I'm good



posted on Dec, 11 2019 @ 05:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: network dude




If you are OK with ignoring the laws you feel are unfair, I can understand that, but to pretend you are some virtuous saint because of that is wrong. At least be honest with yourself. The rest already know.

A personal attack?

I am what I am - I pretend nothing. I stand by my position - though I can see it makes you uncomfortable




LOL, my comfort level is good. Chicken soup on the stove and a cold beer in my hand. Life is good. But as I said, I can admit to understanding when laws are broken, and also admit that it's wrong to break them, instead of change them. And I sure won't be railing on and on about how important it is to follow the law, when I'm breaking them. I have more sense than that.



posted on Dec, 11 2019 @ 05:09 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude




I would not, but I would be painfully aware of the law I was breaking, and when I was next to a Jewish father in a concentration camp for breaking the law, I would know exactly why I was there.


Then you understand my position

Except I wouldn't agonize even the tiniest bit about breaking the law




top topics



 
25
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join