re: For Those Who Support Sanctuary Cities, Convince Me Why It's a Good Thing

Community Policing
Attorney General Sessions has threatened to withhold community policing grants from sanctuary cities. Many city and county police department adopt what they call a “community policing” strategy that does not enforce federal immigration laws. Local law enforcement wants to maintain the trust of everyone in its community. “We don’t care about your immigration status. If you are the victim of a crime, you need to report it,” says Chief Tom Manger of the Montgomery County Police Department in Maryland. “I don’t care who the president is, the federal government cannot tell us how we are going to do our job at the local level.”

Still, Chief Manger says Montgomery County is not a sanctuary jurisdiction. “If we arrest someone for a serious crime — a gang member who is committing armed robberies — and we fingerprint him and the prints go to FBI or DHS, and ICE comes back and asks us, ‘Is he in your jail, and when is he getting out?’ we tell them and ICE will be at the jail to take custody.” But Manger says they will not ask people about their immigration status. “We don’t care,” he says. “What we care about is whether they were the victim of a crime, and whether we can get them the help they need. We need them to trust us, to report crime and to work with us.”

Withholding Federal Funds
President Trump’s executive order threatens to take away funding from cities that violate 8 U.S.C. 1373, the federal law that protects communication between state and local government and ICE. This law is not actually about ICE detainers. But Trump’s executive order also says the US attorney general can designate any state or local government a sanctuary jurisdiction in order to punish it. Most often the sanctuary brand is applied to cities that don’t want to comply with ICE detainers. But ordering cities to comply might violate the US Constitution. “There is really clear Supreme Court case law that says you can’t condition federal grants on requiring people to do something that is illegal,” says Graber, “like holding people in violation of the Fourth Amendment.”

Already six jurisdictions have filed lawsuits charging that President Trump has overstepped his authority — San Francisco was the first, followed by Santa Clara County, California; Chelsea and Lawrence, Massachusets; Richmond, California and Seattle. The basis of all the suits is that the executive order cannot coerce local governments into using their resources to do federal work. The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that this would violate the 10th Amendment. In addition, Seattle is arguing that the executive order violates the Taxing and Spending Clause by holding hostage, for immigration enforcement, funds that are not directly related to those matters. The city also says it has not done anything illegal — even if it wanted to help ICE, it could not because city agencies collect no information on undocumented immigrants.

Welcoming Cities
There is a growing list of communities that label themselves “welcoming.” This is an established network of more than 160 cities and counties guided by the principles put forward by Welcoming America a nonprofit organization begun in 2009. This network includes municipal government, business, faith-based groups and nonprofit outreach organizations that follow principles of inclusion and build communities where immigrants and refugees feel welcome and supported. As the word “sanctuary” becomes more and more controversial, says the ILRC’s Graber, “Many places that want to be somewhat welcoming to immigrants take on the “welcoming” brand, and places that are a little bit more aggressive or anti-Trump embrace the “sanctuary” brand. But they are part of the same spectrum.”

quote:

---

You can't be an anonymous witness

---

Here's something I don't get about your argument. I'll lay it out for you:

(1) I don't recall ever witnessing a criminal action, other than Hillary's campaign, in my whole life. This seems like an exaggerated reason for not allowing local law enforcement to be utilized in the effort against illegal immigration.

(2) I haven't seen any statistics, but my common sense tells me that illegal immigrants disproportionately live in close proximity to each other. Now, if witnessing, reporting & testifying about criminal activity is such a substantial issue with these people, wouldn't it be better for AMERICA if we round up these criminals and deport them?

Seems like all the more reason to get them out of the country. Do That, and NOBODY, legal or illegal, will have to worry about reporting them.

It just seems like a flimsy excuse to me.

quote:

---

I'm not reading your copy/paste job

---

Lol. You asked for info and there it is. I copied and pasted it to make it easy for you. Have someone you know read it aloud to you so you can get through it.

Really weird that you would try to be caddy about me copying and pasting. Lol

quote:

---

Yeah because its just that easy.

---

It could be if we eliminate the emotional bullshite from the process.

quote:

---

I'm not sure if you know this but most of the illegal immigrants came legally and stayed past their visa.

---

Of course I am. That still makes them criminals.

quote:

---

Are you honestly insinuating that we are always supposed to know who they are?

---

No. I'm plainly stating that when we do know who they are, we should deal with them.

quote:

---

Secondly, youre absolutely missing the point of protecting witnesses regardless of their citizenship.

---

Nope, I didn't miss that. I assert that it's irrelevant.

quote:

---

What you don't realize is that the feds want local police forces, which are already underfunded and understaffed, to use their forces to detain people on immigration holds, when they don't have enough jail space for local criminals

---

Link?

quote:

---

, I didn't. I asked for statistics.

You can't provide any so you post some copy/paste nonsense that you likely don't really even understand.

WhiskeyPapa would be proud.

---

What statistics? Totally non sequitur of you. I simply stated a reason for the laws and what local law enforcement says. There is a quote from one such police chief above. You asking for stats is retarded and doesnt even make any sense. What stats, specifically do you desire? Can you even expound?

Since you clearly arent adept at debate, i will fill you in. The burden of proof is on you. If you spent half as much time as you do shooting people's ideas down, and simply read up, you wouldn't need people to explain shite to you on a message board.

Hire American, then get back to me.

quote:

---

Hire American, then get back to me.

---

Not really interested in bumper sticker responses.


Besides, if America needs more labor than the country can supply in certain areas, we still need to be handling that in an organized, legal manner. It shouldn't be determined by how many people can skip across the border & make their way to a sanctuary city.

That's an insane way of handling the problem.

quote:

---

I did

---

You didn't. You've posted no data. A quote from some local police chief doesn't prove anything.

Keep at it.