D
dvdjs
Guest
Specifically, what letter of what law is not being enforced?It doesn’t matter what the letter of the law says if they will not be enforced.
Specifically, what letter of what law is not being enforced?It doesn’t matter what the letter of the law says if they will not be enforced.
No need. Threads wander, it just happened that in this case it led to some confusion.I apologize for the confusion.
Immigration laws in general are not being enforced in those cities. Hence, no letter of the law is being enforced at all. That said, I acknowledge that I’m no longer talking about the topic at hand, and will drop the discussion.ProdglArchitect:![]()
Specifically, what letter of what law is not being enforced?It doesn’t matter what the letter of the law says if they will not be enforced.
Yep. Kamala Harris who’s background is as a prosecutor and state AG before becoming a US senator put it this way:What happened to the Republican Rebel Yell of:
States Rights, States Rights, States Rights
At least that was the war chant when it comes to other issues…
Historically, it was Democrats who abused the 10th amendment in order to maintain segregation, but that said, no state official is required to enforce federal laws, under posse comitatus laws, as I recall.What happened to the Republican Rebel Yell of:
States Rights, States Rights, States Rights
At least that was the war chant when it comes to other issues…
For now. His constituents live in California. Perhaps they will not send him back.
I suspect that federal authorities in these cities are enforcing pertinent federal laws. And that state and local authorizes are enforcing state and local laws. What evidence can you produce to the contrary?Immigration laws in general are not being enforced in those cities
Or, in the case of Oakland, openly acting to aid and abet criminals evading the law.ProdglArchitect:![]()
I suspect that federal authorities in these cities are enforcing pertinent federal laws. And that state and local authorizes are enforcing state and local laws. What evidence can you produce to the contrary?Immigration laws in general are not being enforced in those cities
That is a serious charge. Is that being made by any competent official?Or, in the case of Oakland, openly acting to aid and abet criminals evading the law.
The AG says it is being investigated, but she essentially admitted it. But this is easy:That is a serious charge. Is that being made by any competent official?
After Schaaf learned that there would be an immigration raid in Northern California targeting about 1,000 illegal immigrants deemed “public safety threats” — most of them convicted felons or repeat immigration violators — she took to Twitter to warn everyone about it. As a result, federal officials say, they only managed to catch about 232 of their 1,000 or so targets.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/d...o-enforce-the-law-in-her-city/article/2651117
So this is your legal opinion, FWIW. The mayor consulted with counsel before tweeting, and the legal matter is not as black and white as you think. We’ll see how this “review” plays out.The AG says it is being investigated, but she essentially admitted it.
www.mercurynews.com
www.mercurynews.com
I didn’t say my was a legal opinion, just my opinion. I agree with Sessions, she intentionally put Americans at risk. She’s an absolute scoundrel.So this is your legal opinion, FWIW. The mayor consulted with counsel before tweeting, and the legal matter is not as black and white as you think. We’ll see how this “review” plays out.
No they wouldn’t, not from people who favor unfettered open borders like this mayor does.BTW if ICE were actually focusing on “public safety threats” rather that administrative arrests, they likely would have all of the cooperation in the world.
Because they are part of a greater political movement, to undermine American sovereigntyWhy should illegals be given special consideration?
I didn’t see that anything in her remarks about unfettered open borders, but a problem with ICE’s new focus on administrative arrests.No they wouldn’t, not from people who favor unfettered open borders
So, you’re okay with her intentionally undermining federal law? I see her as no different than George Wallace blocking the school doorJonNC:![]()
I didn’t see that anything in her remarks about unfettered open borders, but a problem with ICE’s new focus on administrative arrests.No they wouldn’t, not from people who favor unfettered open borders
I am okay with waiting to see if her actions constituted a violation of the law.So, you’re okay with her intentionally undermining federal law?
Fascinating.I seecher as no different than George Wallace blocking the school door
Good.I am okay with writng to see if her actions constituted a violation of the law.
“Good” Democrats bothFascinating