Current Events > Federal judge blocks Trump's move to defund sanctuary cities

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2
Antifar 11/21/17 3:23:44 PM #1:	http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/361297-federal-judge-makes-permanent-ruling-against-trumps-sanctuary-city A federal court on Monday blocked President Trump's executive order halting certain federal funds for so-called sanctuary cities, calling it "unconstitutional on its face." "The defendants are permanently enjoined from enforcing Section 9(a) of the Executive Order against jurisdictions they deem as sanctuary jurisdictions. Because Section 9(a) is unconstitutional on its face, and not simply in its application to the plaintiffs here, a nationwide injunction against the defendants other than President Trump is appropriate," U.S. District Judge William Orrick ruled. The injunction comes after Orrick issued a temporary ruling in late April that blocked Trumps directive to withhold some federal funding from cities that refuse to comply fully with federal immigration enforcement, siding with San Francisco and Santa Clara County. The California municipalities had sued over the order, arguing that more than $2 billion in federal funding could be at stake. Orrick, who was appointed by former President Obama, made his April decision permanent on Monday. The Department of Justice slammed the decision in a statement, claiming the court overstepped its authority. The District Court exceeded its authority today when it barred the President from instructing his cabinet members to enforce existing law. The Justice Department will vindicate the Presidents lawful authority to direct the executive branch, said spokesman Devin OMalley. In a statement about his ruling on the case, Orrick dismissed the federal government's argument that the "the Executive Order was meant to be far more narrow than I interpreted it, a mere directive to the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice that does not seek to place any new conditions on federal funds." "I concluded that the County of Santa Clara and the City and County of San Francisco had pre-enforcement standing to protect hundreds of millions of dollars of federal grants from the unconstitutionally broad sweep of the Executive Order," Orrick wrote. --- kin to all that throbs <cite>Antifar posted [p:890816444] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote>http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/361297-federal-judge-makes-permanent-ruling-against-trumps-sanctuary-city <quote>A federal court on Monday blocked President Trump's executive order halting certain federal funds for so-called sanctuary cities, calling it "unconstitutional on its face." "The defendants are permanently enjoined from enforcing Section 9(a) of the Executive Order against jurisdictions they deem as sanctuary jurisdictions. Because Section 9(a) is unconstitutional on its face, and not simply in its application to the plaintiffs here, a nationwide injunction against the defendants other than President Trump is appropriate," U.S. District Judge William Orrick ruled. The injunction comes after Orrick issued a temporary ruling in late April that blocked Trumps directive to withhold some federal funding from cities that refuse to comply fully with federal immigration enforcement, siding with San Francisco and Santa Clara County. The California municipalities had sued over the order, arguing that more than $2 billion in federal funding could be at stake. Orrick, who was appointed by former President Obama, made his April decision permanent on Monday. The Department of Justice slammed the decision in a statement, claiming the court overstepped its authority. The District Court exceeded its authority today when it barred the President from instructing his cabinet members to enforce existing law. The Justice Department will vindicate the Presidents lawful authority to direct the executive branch, said spokesman Devin OMalley. In a statement about his ruling on the case, Orrick dismissed the federal government's argument that the "the Executive Order was meant to be far more narrow than I interpreted it, a mere directive to the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice that does not seek to place any new conditions on federal funds." "I concluded that the County of Santa Clara and the City and County of San Francisco had pre-enforcement standing to protect hundreds of millions of dollars of federal grants from the unconstitutionally broad sweep of the Executive Order," Orrick wrote.</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Samurontai 11/21/17 3:25:50 PM #2:	Good, fuck that orange fuck --- http://i.imgur.com/Scl5rwX.gif http://i.imgur.com/Fjgt7Qq.gif http://i.imgur.com/NidhAni.gif http://i.imgur.com/IGIbQPk.gif <cite>Samurontai posted [p:890816572] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote>Good, fuck that orange fuck</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
tennisdude818 11/21/17 3:30:28 PM #3:	There is little reason to respect the rule of law when its selectively enforced. So there are cities where immigration law doesnt count. Are there cities where some other law I disagree with doesnt count? --- "Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it." -Thomas Sowell <cite>tennisdude818 posted [p:890816882] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote>There is little reason to respect the rule of law when its selectively enforced. So there are cities where immigration law doesnt count. Are there cities where some other law I disagree with doesnt count?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Blue_Inigo 11/21/17 3:31:26 PM #4:	Samurontai posted... Good, fuck that orange fuck --- "This is your last dance." <cite>Blue_Inigo posted [p:890816955] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>Samurontai posted...</cite> <quote>Good, fuck that orange fuck</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
CableZL 11/21/17 3:32:05 PM #5:	This kind of thing has been blocked by the courts before. The president can't add extra stipulations on funds already allocated by Congress. --- http://i.imgur.com/ByKGlJb.gif http://i.imgur.com/nZdaA8D.gif http://i.imgur.com/VBLBILg.jpg <cite>CableZL posted [p:890817002] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote>This kind of thing has been blocked by the courts before. The president can't add extra stipulations on funds already allocated by Congress.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
GeneralZhao 11/21/17 3:33:33 PM #6:	`W I N N I N G` winning --- https://imgur.com/a/f52rH <cite>GeneralZhao posted [p:890817091] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote> W I N N I N G winning</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Ic3Bullet 11/21/17 3:34:35 PM #7:	Just curious can Trump fire the federal judge? <cite>Ic3Bullet posted [p:890817147] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote>Just curious can Trump fire the federal judge?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zikten 11/21/17 3:35:10 PM #8:	people need to stop calling Trump a tyrant. tyrants don't get defied by judges <cite>Zikten posted [p:890817188] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote>people need to stop calling Trump a tyrant. tyrants don't get defied by judges</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Cj_WlLL_VVlN 11/21/17 3:36:34 PM #9:	tennisdude818 posted... There is little reason to respect the rule of law when its selectively enforced. So there are cities where immigration law doesnt count. Are there cities where some other law I disagree with doesnt count? Nobody isn't enforcing the law. Immigration isn't a state or local issue and federal law enforcement is more than able to enforce federal law in sanctuary cities. The idea that local law enforcement should have to waste city money to enforce federal law is ridiculous. --- The gamefaqs moderation team knows dogs capable of being offended, cant laugh at a joke, and like to punish jokes that are acceptable on prime time TV pg shows. <cite>Cj_WlLL_VVlN posted [p:890817261] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote>There is little reason to respect the rule of law when its selectively enforced. So there are cities where immigration law doesnt count. Are there cities where some other law I disagree with doesnt count?</quote> Nobody isn't enforcing the law. Immigration isn't a state or local issue and federal law enforcement is more than able to enforce federal law in sanctuary cities. The idea that local law enforcement should have to waste city money to enforce federal law is ridiculous.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kineth 11/21/17 3:37:15 PM #10:	Zikten posted... people need to stop calling Trump a tyrant. tyrants don't get defied by judges Well, I don't know what argument you're needlessly defending against, but saying that he's not a tyrant because he got blocked by checks and balances isn't a compelling argument. --- If you're not looking for any honest discussion, agreement, meeting halfway or middle ground, don't bother arguing with me. Selfish narcissists need not apply. <cite>Kineth posted [p:890817315] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>Zikten posted...</cite> <quote>people need to stop calling Trump a tyrant. tyrants don't get defied by judges</quote> Well, I don't know what argument you're needlessly defending against, but saying that he's not a tyrant because he got blocked by checks and balances isn't a compelling argument.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Cj_WlLL_VVlN 11/21/17 3:37:51 PM #11:	Ic3Bullet posted... Just curious can Trump fire the federal judge? I believe they can be impeached by congress but not fired. --- The gamefaqs moderation team knows dogs capable of being offended, cant laugh at a joke, and like to punish jokes that are acceptable on prime time TV pg shows. <cite>Cj_WlLL_VVlN posted [p:890817371] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>Ic3Bullet posted...</cite> <quote>Just curious can Trump fire the federal judge?</quote> I believe they can be impeached by congress but not fired.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
E32005 11/21/17 3:37:59 PM #12:	Blue_Inigo posted... Samurontai posted... Good, fuck that orange fuck I cant take any more winning guys --- http://i.imgur.com/LAvnefi.gif http://i.imgur.com/6kW9fXL.gif <cite>E32005 posted [p:890817378] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>Blue_Inigo posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Samurontai posted...</cite> <quote>Good, fuck that orange fuck</quote></quote> I cant take any more winning guys</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zikten 11/21/17 3:38:43 PM #13:	Kineth posted... but saying that he's not a tyrant because he got blocked by checks and balances isn't a compelling argument. actually it is. tyrants don't have checks and balances. that is my point. <cite>Zikten posted [p:890817426] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kineth posted...</cite> <quote>but saying that he's not a tyrant because he got blocked by checks and balances isn't a compelling argument.</quote> actually it is. tyrants don't have checks and balances. that is my point.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kineth 11/21/17 3:39:28 PM #14:	Zikten posted... Kineth posted... but saying that he's not a tyrant because he got blocked by checks and balances isn't a compelling argument. actually it is. tyrants don't have checks and balances. that is my point. So he's a tyrant that is being kept in check. The system and him aren't the same thing. Either way, this is a dumb hill to die on. --- If you're not looking for any honest discussion, agreement, meeting halfway or middle ground, don't bother arguing with me. Selfish narcissists need not apply. <cite>Kineth posted [p:890817473] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>Zikten posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kineth posted...</cite> <quote>but saying that he's not a tyrant because he got blocked by checks and balances isn't a compelling argument.</quote> actually it is. tyrants don't have checks and balances. that is my point.</quote> So he's a tyrant that is being kept in check. The system and him aren't the same thing. Either way, this is a dumb hill to die on.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Neoconkers 11/21/17 3:39:56 PM #15:	Kineth posted... Zikten posted... Kineth posted... but saying that he's not a tyrant because he got blocked by checks and balances isn't a compelling argument. actually it is. tyrants don't have checks and balances. that is my point. So he's a tyrant that is being kept in check. The system and him aren't the same thing. Either way, this is a dumb hill to die on. an attempted tyrant, you could say --- Girls = Time x Money. Time = Money. Girls = Money x Money = Money sq. Money = sqrt Evil: Girls = sqrt Evil sq. Girls = Evil <cite>Neoconkers posted [p:890817507] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kineth posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zikten posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kineth posted...</cite> <quote>but saying that he's not a tyrant because he got blocked by checks and balances isn't a compelling argument.</quote> actually it is. tyrants don't have checks and balances. that is my point.</quote> So he's a tyrant that is being kept in check. The system and him aren't the same thing. Either way, this is a dumb hill to die on.</quote> an attempted tyrant, you could say</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Phantom_Nook 11/21/17 3:40:08 PM #16:	Samurontai posted... Good, fuck that orange fuck --- Posted with GameRaven 3.3 <cite>Phantom_Nook posted [p:890817517] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>Samurontai posted...</cite> <quote>Good, fuck that orange fuck</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zeeak4444 11/21/17 3:40:28 PM #17:	Zikten posted... Kineth posted... but saying that he's not a tyrant because he got blocked by checks and balances isn't a compelling argument. actually it is. tyrants don't have checks and balances. that is my point. And Trump has done what he can to overstep those checks and balances through executive orders so you're argument falls apart again. He might not be an established tyrant but that doesn't mean he's not an aspiring one. Edit: never mind, just realized who I was responding to. --- Typical gameFAQers are "Complainers that always complain about those who complain about real legitimate complaints."-Joker_X <cite>Zeeak4444 posted [p:890817541] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>Zikten posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kineth posted...</cite> <quote>but saying that he's not a tyrant because he got blocked by checks and balances isn't a compelling argument.</quote> actually it is. tyrants don't have checks and balances. that is my point.</quote> And Trump has done what he can to overstep those checks and balances through executive orders so you're argument falls apart again. He might not be an established tyrant but that doesn't mean he's not an aspiring one. Edit: never mind, just realized who I was responding to.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
literal_garbage 11/21/17 3:41:01 PM #18:	Kineth posted... Zikten posted... Kineth posted... but saying that he's not a tyrant because he got blocked by checks and balances isn't a compelling argument. actually it is. tyrants don't have checks and balances. that is my point. So he's a tyrant that is being kept in check. The system and him aren't the same thing. Either way, this is a dumb hill to die on. First time talking to zikten? --- - literal garbage <cite>literal_garbage posted [p:890817569] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kineth posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zikten posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kineth posted...</cite> <quote>but saying that he's not a tyrant because he got blocked by checks and balances isn't a compelling argument.</quote> actually it is. tyrants don't have checks and balances. that is my point.</quote> So he's a tyrant that is being kept in check. The system and him aren't the same thing. Either way, this is a dumb hill to die on.</quote> First time talking to zikten?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
chill02 11/21/17 3:41:57 PM #19:	GeneralZhao posted... `W I N N I N G` winning --- Ave, true to Caesar. <cite>chill02 posted [p:890817624] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>GeneralZhao posted...</cite> <quote> W I N N I N G winning</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kineth 11/21/17 3:42:25 PM #20:	literal_garbage posted... Kineth posted... Zikten posted... Kineth posted... but saying that he's not a tyrant because he got blocked by checks and balances isn't a compelling argument. actually it is. tyrants don't have checks and balances. that is my point. So he's a tyrant that is being kept in check. The system and him aren't the same thing. Either way, this is a dumb hill to die on. First time talking to zikten? No, that's why I didn't put much effort into my response, especially since very little was required in the first place. --- If you're not looking for any honest discussion, agreement, meeting halfway or middle ground, don't bother arguing with me. Selfish narcissists need not apply. <cite>Kineth posted [p:890817642] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>literal_garbage posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kineth posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zikten posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kineth posted...</cite> <quote>but saying that he's not a tyrant because he got blocked by checks and balances isn't a compelling argument.</quote> actually it is. tyrants don't have checks and balances. that is my point.</quote> So he's a tyrant that is being kept in check. The system and him aren't the same thing. Either way, this is a dumb hill to die on.</quote> First time talking to zikten?</quote> No, that's why I didn't put much effort into my response, especially since very little was required in the first place.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
tennisdude818 11/21/17 3:47:11 PM #21:	Cj_WlLL_VVlN posted... tennisdude818 posted... There is little reason to respect the rule of law when its selectively enforced. So there are cities where immigration law doesnt count. Are there cities where some other law I disagree with doesnt count? Nobody isn't enforcing the law. Immigration isn't a state or local issue and federal law enforcement is more than able to enforce federal law in sanctuary cities. The idea that local law enforcement should have to waste city money to enforce federal law is ridiculous. By blocking federal law, local resources are heavily used to provide public services for illegals. --- "Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it." -Thomas Sowell <cite>tennisdude818 posted [p:890817946] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>Cj_WlLL_VVlN posted...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote>There is little reason to respect the rule of law when its selectively enforced. So there are cities where immigration law doesnt count. Are there cities where some other law I disagree with doesnt count?</quote> Nobody isn't enforcing the law. Immigration isn't a state or local issue and federal law enforcement is more than able to enforce federal law in sanctuary cities. The idea that local law enforcement should have to waste city money to enforce federal law is ridiculous.</quote> By blocking federal law, local resources are heavily used to provide public services for illegals.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Solid Sonic 11/21/17 3:49:10 PM #22:	tennisdude818 posted... Cj_WlLL_VVlN posted... tennisdude818 posted... There is little reason to respect the rule of law when its selectively enforced. So there are cities where immigration law doesnt count. Are there cities where some other law I disagree with doesnt count? Nobody isn't enforcing the law. Immigration isn't a state or local issue and federal law enforcement is more than able to enforce federal law in sanctuary cities. The idea that local law enforcement should have to waste city money to enforce federal law is ridiculous. By blocking federal law, local resources are heavily used to provide public services for illegals. Sounds like a coinflip, especially since illegal immigrants have to be paid under the table, thus adding strain to the local government without anything going back in. --- DorkLink said I could borrow his signature so I did (see below): <cite>Solid Sonic posted [p:890818071] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Cj_WlLL_VVlN posted...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote>There is little reason to respect the rule of law when its selectively enforced. So there are cities where immigration law doesnt count. Are there cities where some other law I disagree with doesnt count?</quote> Nobody isn't enforcing the law. Immigration isn't a state or local issue and federal law enforcement is more than able to enforce federal law in sanctuary cities. The idea that local law enforcement should have to waste city money to enforce federal law is ridiculous.</quote> By blocking federal law, local resources are heavily used to provide public services for illegals.</quote> Sounds like a coinflip, especially since illegal immigrants have to be paid under the table, thus adding strain to the local government without anything going back in.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Balrog0 11/21/17 3:49:35 PM #23:	tennisdude818 posted... There is little reason to respect the rule of law when its selectively enforced. So there are cities where immigration law doesnt count. Are there cities where some other law I disagree with doesnt count? yes, there are entire states where drug laws are essentially unenforced because state and federal law differ --- He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor. <cite>Balrog0 posted [p:890818108] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote>There is little reason to respect the rule of law when its selectively enforced. So there are cities where immigration law doesnt count. Are there cities where some other law I disagree with doesnt count?</quote> yes, there are entire states where drug laws are essentially unenforced because state and federal law differ</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Cj_WlLL_VVlN 11/21/17 3:51:40 PM #24:	tennisdude818 posted... Cj_WlLL_VVlN posted... tennisdude818 posted... There is little reason to respect the rule of law when its selectively enforced. So there are cities where immigration law doesnt count. Are there cities where some other law I disagree with doesnt count? Nobody isn't enforcing the law. Immigration isn't a state or local issue and federal law enforcement is more than able to enforce federal law in sanctuary cities. The idea that local law enforcement should have to waste city money to enforce federal law is ridiculous. By blocking federal law, local resources are heavily used to provide public services for illegals. That's not blocking federal law. Federal agents still enforce federal law in sanctuary cities. If ice shows up in San Francisco the cops aren't gonna stop them. I hate conservatives that are all muh states rights until they disagree and then it's fuck you submit to the fed! --- The gamefaqs moderation team knows dogs capable of being offended, cant laugh at a joke, and like to punish jokes that are acceptable on prime time TV pg shows. <cite>Cj_WlLL_VVlN posted [p:890818244] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Cj_WlLL_VVlN posted...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote>There is little reason to respect the rule of law when its selectively enforced. So there are cities where immigration law doesnt count. Are there cities where some other law I disagree with doesnt count?</quote> Nobody isn't enforcing the law. Immigration isn't a state or local issue and federal law enforcement is more than able to enforce federal law in sanctuary cities. The idea that local law enforcement should have to waste city money to enforce federal law is ridiculous.</quote> By blocking federal law, local resources are heavily used to provide public services for illegals.</quote> That's not blocking federal law. Federal agents still enforce federal law in sanctuary cities. If ice shows up in San Francisco the cops aren't gonna stop them. I hate conservatives that are all muh states rights until they disagree and then it's fuck you submit to the fed!</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
muchdran 11/21/17 3:53:14 PM #25:	Fuck sanctuary cities --- If liberals didn't have double standards, they wouldn't have standards at all. <cite>muchdran posted [p:890818365] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote>Fuck sanctuary cities</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
creativerealms 11/21/17 3:53:14 PM #26:	"America first" De funds American cities" That is Trump's idea of America first. --- No sig. <cite>creativerealms posted [p:890818366] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote>"America first" De funds American cities" That is Trump's idea of America first.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Rika_Furude 11/21/17 3:56:17 PM #27:	If they were american cities they should try following american law --- Posted with GameRaven 3.3 <cite>Rika_Furude posted [p:890818573] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote>If they were american cities they should try following american law</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Questionmarktarius 11/21/17 3:57:35 PM #28:	Saw that coming. The House has to instigate such a thing, per the "power of the purse" provisions. <cite>Questionmarktarius posted [p:890818660] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote>Saw that coming. The House has to instigate such a thing, per the "power of the purse" provisions.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zeeak4444 11/21/17 3:58:12 PM #29:	Rika_Furude posted... If they were american cities they should try following american law Spoken like someone who knows next to nothing about American Law or the judicial system. --- Typical gameFAQers are "Complainers that always complain about those who complain about real legitimate complaints."-Joker_X <cite>Zeeak4444 posted [p:890818700] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>Rika_Furude posted...</cite> <quote>If they were american cities they should try following american law</quote> Spoken like someone who knows next to nothing about American Law or the judicial system.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
JE19426 11/21/17 3:58:46 PM #30:	tennisdude818 posted... By blocking federal law States and Cities can't block Federal Law. Rika_Furude posted... If they were american cities they should try following american law They do follow American law. <cite>JE19426 posted [p:890818741] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote>By blocking federal law</quote> States and Cities can't block Federal Law. <cite>Rika_Furude posted...</cite> <quote>If they were american cities they should try following american law</quote> They do follow American law.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
tennisdude818 11/21/17 3:58:52 PM #31:	Balrog0 posted... tennisdude818 posted... There is little reason to respect the rule of law when its selectively enforced. So there are cities where immigration law doesnt count. Are there cities where some other law I disagree with doesnt count? yes, there are entire states where drug laws are essentially unenforced because state and federal law differ Fair enough. As an opponent of the war on drugs, Id ideally like to see it end on all government levels. --- "Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it." -Thomas Sowell <cite>tennisdude818 posted [p:890818750] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>Balrog0 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote>There is little reason to respect the rule of law when its selectively enforced. So there are cities where immigration law doesnt count. Are there cities where some other law I disagree with doesnt count?</quote> yes, there are entire states where drug laws are essentially unenforced because state and federal law differ</quote> Fair enough. As an opponent of the war on drugs, Id ideally like to see it end on all government levels.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
tennisdude818 11/21/17 3:59:49 PM #32:	JE19426 posted... tennisdude818 posted... By blocking federal law States and Cities can't block Federal Law. They clearly can block enforcement. --- "Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it." -Thomas Sowell <cite>tennisdude818 posted [p:890818809] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>JE19426 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote>By blocking federal law</quote> States and Cities can't block Federal Law. </quote> They clearly can block enforcement.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
E32005 11/21/17 4:00:57 PM #33:	muchdran posted... Fuck sanctuary cities Boo hoo snowflake --- http://i.imgur.com/LAvnefi.gif http://i.imgur.com/6kW9fXL.gif <cite>E32005 posted [p:890818888] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>muchdran posted...</cite> <quote>Fuck sanctuary cities</quote> Boo hoo snowflake</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
K181 11/21/17 4:01:10 PM #34:	tennisdude818 posted... Cj_WlLL_VVlN posted... tennisdude818 posted... There is little reason to respect the rule of law when its selectively enforced. So there are cities where immigration law doesnt count. Are there cities where some other law I disagree with doesnt count? Nobody isn't enforcing the law. Immigration isn't a state or local issue and federal law enforcement is more than able to enforce federal law in sanctuary cities. The idea that local law enforcement should have to waste city money to enforce federal law is ridiculous. By blocking federal law, local resources are heavily used to provide public services for illegals. What federal laws are being blocked by sanctuary cities? tennisdude818 posted... JE19426 posted... tennisdude818 posted... By blocking federal law States and Cities can't block Federal Law. They clearly can block enforcement. How? --- The poster formerly known as Kakarot181: July 2, 2002 - March 14, 2012. Irregardless, for all intensive purposes, I could care less. <cite>K181 posted [p:890818899] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Cj_WlLL_VVlN posted...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote>There is little reason to respect the rule of law when its selectively enforced. So there are cities where immigration law doesnt count. Are there cities where some other law I disagree with doesnt count?</quote> Nobody isn't enforcing the law. Immigration isn't a state or local issue and federal law enforcement is more than able to enforce federal law in sanctuary cities. The idea that local law enforcement should have to waste city money to enforce federal law is ridiculous.</quote> By blocking federal law, local resources are heavily used to provide public services for illegals.</quote> What federal laws are being blocked by sanctuary cities? <cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>JE19426 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote>By blocking federal law</quote> States and Cities can't block Federal Law. </quote> They clearly can block enforcement.</quote> How?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
JE19426 11/21/17 4:03:43 PM #35:	tennisdude818 posted... They clearly can block enforcement. No, they can't. <cite>JE19426 posted [p:890819054] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote>They clearly can block enforcement. </quote> No, they can't.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Questionmarktarius 11/21/17 4:03:57 PM #36:	tennisdude818 posted... JE19426 posted... tennisdude818 posted... By blocking federal law States and Cities can't block Federal Law. They clearly can block enforcement. I dunno. A couple or three federal pot raids needs to happen in Denver, just to backfire spectacularly. It would suck for everyone involved, but it would unwind the war on drugs pretty quickly. <cite>Questionmarktarius posted [p:890819073] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>JE19426 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote>By blocking federal law</quote> States and Cities can't block Federal Law. </quote> They clearly can block enforcement.</quote> I dunno. A couple or three federal pot raids needs to happen in Denver, just to backfire spectacularly. It would suck for everyone involved, but it would unwind the war on drugs pretty quickly.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
tennisdude818 11/21/17 4:12:12 PM #37:	Cj_WlLL_VVlN posted... tennisdude818 posted... Cj_WlLL_VVlN posted... tennisdude818 posted... There is little reason to respect the rule of law when its selectively enforced. So there are cities where immigration law doesnt count. Are there cities where some other law I disagree with doesnt count? Nobody isn't enforcing the law. Immigration isn't a state or local issue and federal law enforcement is more than able to enforce federal law in sanctuary cities. The idea that local law enforcement should have to waste city money to enforce federal law is ridiculous. By blocking federal law, local resources are heavily used to provide public services for illegals. That's not blocking federal law. Federal agents still enforce federal law in sanctuary cities. If ice shows up in San Francisco the cops aren't gonna stop them. I hate conservatives that are all muh states rights until they disagree and then it's fuck you submit to the fed! Local law enforcement can refuse to hand inmates over at the feds request. There isnt much ICE can do if the illegal is let out of jail before ICE arrives. Immigration is obviously a federal issue. The left wants the federal government in many aspects of our life, but has a problem with borders, a very basic function of government for a very long time. --- "Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it." -Thomas Sowell <cite>tennisdude818 posted [p:890819600] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>Cj_WlLL_VVlN posted...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Cj_WlLL_VVlN posted...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote>There is little reason to respect the rule of law when its selectively enforced. So there are cities where immigration law doesnt count. Are there cities where some other law I disagree with doesnt count?</quote> Nobody isn't enforcing the law. Immigration isn't a state or local issue and federal law enforcement is more than able to enforce federal law in sanctuary cities. The idea that local law enforcement should have to waste city money to enforce federal law is ridiculous.</quote> By blocking federal law, local resources are heavily used to provide public services for illegals.</quote> That's not blocking federal law. Federal agents still enforce federal law in sanctuary cities. If ice shows up in San Francisco the cops aren't gonna stop them. I hate conservatives that are all muh states rights until they disagree and then it's fuck you submit to the fed!</quote> Local law enforcement can refuse to hand inmates over at the feds request. There isnt much ICE can do if the illegal is let out of jail before ICE arrives. Immigration is obviously a federal issue. The left wants the federal government in many aspects of our life, but has a problem with borders, a very basic function of government for a very long time.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
JE19426 11/21/17 4:16:51 PM #38:	tennisdude818 posted... Local law enforcement can refuse to hand inmates over at the feds request. There isnt much ICE can do if the illegal is let out of jail before ICE arrives. I'm not sure what point you are getting at here. <cite>JE19426 posted [p:890819888] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote>Local law enforcement can refuse to hand inmates over at the feds request. There isnt much ICE can do if the illegal is let out of jail before ICE arrives. </quote> I'm not sure what point you are getting at here.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Funbazooka 11/21/17 4:17:57 PM #39:	muchdran posted... Fuck sanctuary cities --- I'll defend any man's Funbazooka! <cite>Funbazooka posted [p:890819960] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>muchdran posted...</cite> <quote>Fuck sanctuary cities</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Cj_WlLL_VVlN 11/21/17 4:19:16 PM #40:	tennisdude818 posted... Cj_WlLL_VVlN posted... tennisdude818 posted... Cj_WlLL_VVlN posted... tennisdude818 posted... There is little reason to respect the rule of law when its selectively enforced. So there are cities where immigration law doesnt count. Are there cities where some other law I disagree with doesnt count? Nobody isn't enforcing the law. Immigration isn't a state or local issue and federal law enforcement is more than able to enforce federal law in sanctuary cities. The idea that local law enforcement should have to waste city money to enforce federal law is ridiculous. By blocking federal law, local resources are heavily used to provide public services for illegals. That's not blocking federal law. Federal agents still enforce federal law in sanctuary cities. If ice shows up in San Francisco the cops aren't gonna stop them. I hate conservatives that are all muh states rights until they disagree and then it's fuck you submit to the fed! Local law enforcement can refuse to hand inmates over at the feds request. There isnt much ICE can do if the illegal is let out of jail before ICE arrives. Immigration is obviously a federal issue. The left wants the federal government in many aspects of our life, but has a problem with borders, a very basic function of government for a very long time. Im not left. Slightly right, pretty libertarian. I just don't understand the idea that the states should be required to do the federal governments job. --- The gamefaqs moderation team knows dogs capable of being offended, cant laugh at a joke, and like to punish jokes that are acceptable on prime time TV pg shows. <cite>Cj_WlLL_VVlN posted [p:890820056] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Cj_WlLL_VVlN posted...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Cj_WlLL_VVlN posted...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote>There is little reason to respect the rule of law when its selectively enforced. So there are cities where immigration law doesnt count. Are there cities where some other law I disagree with doesnt count?</quote> Nobody isn't enforcing the law. Immigration isn't a state or local issue and federal law enforcement is more than able to enforce federal law in sanctuary cities. The idea that local law enforcement should have to waste city money to enforce federal law is ridiculous.</quote> By blocking federal law, local resources are heavily used to provide public services for illegals.</quote> That's not blocking federal law. Federal agents still enforce federal law in sanctuary cities. If ice shows up in San Francisco the cops aren't gonna stop them. I hate conservatives that are all muh states rights until they disagree and then it's fuck you submit to the fed!</quote> Local law enforcement can refuse to hand inmates over at the feds request. There isnt much ICE can do if the illegal is let out of jail before ICE arrives. Immigration is obviously a federal issue. The left wants the federal government in many aspects of our life, but has a problem with borders, a very basic function of government for a very long time.</quote> Im not left. Slightly right, pretty libertarian. I just don't understand the idea that the states should be required to do the federal governments job.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
tennisdude818 11/21/17 4:19:40 PM #41:	K181 posted... tennisdude818 posted... Cj_WlLL_VVlN posted... tennisdude818 posted... There is little reason to respect the rule of law when its selectively enforced. So there are cities where immigration law doesnt count. Are there cities where some other law I disagree with doesnt count? Nobody isn't enforcing the law. Immigration isn't a state or local issue and federal law enforcement is more than able to enforce federal law in sanctuary cities. The idea that local law enforcement should have to waste city money to enforce federal law is ridiculous. By blocking federal law, local resources are heavily used to provide public services for illegals. What federal laws are being blocked by sanctuary cities? tennisdude818 posted... JE19426 posted... tennisdude818 posted... By blocking federal law States and Cities can't block Federal Law. They clearly can block enforcement. How? Not using municipal resources on matters that aren't under their purview is not blocking enforcement or federal legislation. Immigration is not the responsibility of local authorities, and sanctuary cities merely don't use resources investigating or reporting illegal immigration. An illegal gets arrested, ICE checks the fingerprint and tells the county to hold the inmate for a couple more days, and the county says no. The intent here is clearly to block federal immigration law. Not to save costs by holding onto as many illegals as possible. That doesnt actually save money. --- "Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it." -Thomas Sowell <cite>tennisdude818 posted [p:890820076] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>K181 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Cj_WlLL_VVlN posted...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote>There is little reason to respect the rule of law when its selectively enforced. So there are cities where immigration law doesnt count. Are there cities where some other law I disagree with doesnt count?</quote> Nobody isn't enforcing the law. Immigration isn't a state or local issue and federal law enforcement is more than able to enforce federal law in sanctuary cities. The idea that local law enforcement should have to waste city money to enforce federal law is ridiculous.</quote> By blocking federal law, local resources are heavily used to provide public services for illegals.</quote> What federal laws are being blocked by sanctuary cities? <cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>JE19426 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote>By blocking federal law</quote> States and Cities can't block Federal Law. </quote> They clearly can block enforcement.</quote> How? Not using municipal resources on matters that aren't under their purview is not blocking enforcement or federal legislation. Immigration is not the responsibility of local authorities, and sanctuary cities merely don't use resources investigating or reporting illegal immigration.</quote> An illegal gets arrested, ICE checks the fingerprint and tells the county to hold the inmate for a couple more days, and the county says no. The intent here is clearly to block federal immigration law. Not to save costs by holding onto as many illegals as possible. That doesnt actually save money.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Questionmarktarius 11/21/17 4:24:24 PM #42:	tennisdude818 posted... An illegal gets arrested, ICE checks the fingerprint and tells the county to hold the inmate for a couple more days, and the county says no. The intent here is clearly to block federal immigration law. Not to save costs by holding onto as many illegals as possible. That doesnt actually save money. The logical next step here is ICE field offices suddenly appearing in or very near sanctuary cities, and the next next step is a 'revolving door' for illegals arrested for pretty much anything, when the ICE guys have a half-hour response time. It's going to get a hell of a lot worse, very fast. <cite>Questionmarktarius posted [p:890820330] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote>An illegal gets arrested, ICE checks the fingerprint and tells the county to hold the inmate for a couple more days, and the county says no. The intent here is clearly to block federal immigration law. Not to save costs by holding onto as many illegals as possible. That doesnt actually save money.</quote> The logical next step here is ICE field offices suddenly appearing in or very near sanctuary cities, and the next next step is a 'revolving door' for illegals arrested for pretty much anything, when the ICE guys have a half-hour response time. It's going to get a hell of a lot worse, very fast.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
JE19426 11/21/17 4:26:47 PM #43:	tennisdude818 posted... Not to save costs by holding onto as many illegals as possible. That doesnt actually save money. Oh? Does ICE refund the money local jails spend keeping people they requested behind bars? <cite>JE19426 posted [p:890820487] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote>Not to save costs by holding onto as many illegals as possible. That doesnt actually save money. </quote> Oh? Does ICE refund the money local jails spend keeping people they requested behind bars?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
tennisdude818 11/21/17 4:32:44 PM #44:	Questionmarktarius posted... tennisdude818 posted... An illegal gets arrested, ICE checks the fingerprint and tells the county to hold the inmate for a couple more days, and the county says no. The intent here is clearly to block federal immigration law. Not to save costs by holding onto as many illegals as possible. That doesnt actually save money. The logical next step here is ICE field offices suddenly appearing in or very near sanctuary cities, and the next next step is a 'revolving door' for illegals arrested for pretty much anything, when the ICE guys have a half-hour response time. It's going to get a hell of a lot worse, very fast. It does sound like Trump is moving ICE in this direction. Im not sure how far it will go. --- "Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it." -Thomas Sowell <cite>tennisdude818 posted [p:890820849] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>Questionmarktarius posted...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote>An illegal gets arrested, ICE checks the fingerprint and tells the county to hold the inmate for a couple more days, and the county says no. The intent here is clearly to block federal immigration law. Not to save costs by holding onto as many illegals as possible. That doesnt actually save money.</quote> The logical next step here is ICE field offices suddenly appearing in or very near sanctuary cities, and the next next step is a 'revolving door' for illegals arrested for pretty much anything, when the ICE guys have a half-hour response time. It's going to get a hell of a lot worse, very fast.</quote> It does sound like Trump is moving ICE in this direction. Im not sure how far it will go.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Funbazooka 11/21/17 4:34:50 PM #45:	Questionmarktarius posted... tennisdude818 posted... An illegal gets arrested, ICE checks the fingerprint and tells the county to hold the inmate for a couple more days, and the county says no. The intent here is clearly to block federal immigration law. Not to save costs by holding onto as many illegals as possible. That doesnt actually save money. The logical next step here is ICE field offices suddenly appearing in or very near sanctuary cities, and the next next step is a 'revolving door' for illegals arrested for pretty much anything, when the ICE guys have a half-hour response time. It's going to get a hell of a lot worse, very fast. I think you mean better. --- I'll defend any man's Funbazooka! <cite>Funbazooka posted [p:890820967] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>Questionmarktarius posted...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote>An illegal gets arrested, ICE checks the fingerprint and tells the county to hold the inmate for a couple more days, and the county says no. The intent here is clearly to block federal immigration law. Not to save costs by holding onto as many illegals as possible. That doesnt actually save money.</quote> The logical next step here is ICE field offices suddenly appearing in or very near sanctuary cities, and the next next step is a 'revolving door' for illegals arrested for pretty much anything, when the ICE guys have a half-hour response time. It's going to get a hell of a lot worse, very fast.</quote> I think you mean better.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
tennisdude818 11/21/17 4:35:04 PM #46:	JE19426 posted... tennisdude818 posted... Not to save costs by holding onto as many illegals as possible. That doesnt actually save money. Oh? Does ICE refund the money local jails spend keeping people they requested behind bars? Im saying that expenses associated with having tons of illegal immigrants goes way beyond holding inmates in jail for a couple extra days. --- "Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it." -Thomas Sowell <cite>tennisdude818 posted [p:890820978] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>JE19426 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote>Not to save costs by holding onto as many illegals as possible. That doesnt actually save money. </quote> Oh? Does ICE refund the money local jails spend keeping people they requested behind bars?</quote> Im saying that expenses associated with having tons of illegal immigrants goes way beyond holding inmates in jail for a couple extra days.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Questionmarktarius 11/21/17 4:37:33 PM #47:	Funbazooka posted... I think you mean better. What's "better" about hard criminals being "oops" released before ICE can drive the handful of miles over there? "Undocumented" has strong potential of being a free pass, just to spite the feds. <cite>Questionmarktarius posted [p:890821141] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>Funbazooka posted...</cite> <quote>I think you mean better.</quote> What's "better" about hard criminals being "oops" released before ICE can drive the handful of miles over there? "Undocumented" has strong potential of being a free pass, just to spite the feds.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Balrog0 11/21/17 4:38:18 PM #48:	tennisdude818 posted... Im saying that expenses associated with having tons of illegal immigrants goes way beyond holding inmates in jail for a couple extra days. many people dispute that notion -- many of the people disputing that notion live in sanctuary cities --- He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor. <cite>Balrog0 posted [p:890821201] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>tennisdude818 posted...</cite> <quote>Im saying that expenses associated with having tons of illegal immigrants goes way beyond holding inmates in jail for a couple extra days.</quote> many people dispute that notion -- many of the people disputing that notion live in sanctuary cities</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Polycosm 11/21/17 4:39:24 PM #49:	This was the right decision, but California is totally hypocritical on this issue. The CA state government has reserved the power to withhold funding from any CA city which hires a single non-union worker to build public works (doesn't matter if it's 100% city-funded, and it takes 5 years to get off the blacklist). I'm skeptical of the logic that the Federal gov't isn't allowed to withhold funds from CA, yet CA has free-rein to hold funding hostage from its own cities. This abuse of power should be struck down at all levels. --- BKSheikah owned me so thoroughly in the 2017 guru contest, I'd swear he used the Lens of Truth to pick his bracket. (thengamer.com/guru) <cite>Polycosm posted [p:890821279] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote>This was the right decision, but California is totally hypocritical on this issue. The CA state government has reserved the power to withhold funding from any CA city which hires a single non-union worker to build public works (doesn't matter if it's 100% city-funded, and it takes 5 years to get off the blacklist). I'm skeptical of the logic that the Federal gov't isn't allowed to withhold funds from CA, yet CA has free-rein to hold funding hostage from its own cities. This abuse of power should be struck down at all levels.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Questionmarktarius 11/21/17 4:41:03 PM #50:	Polycosm posted... I'm skeptical of the logic that the Federal gov't isn't allowed to withhold funds from CA, yet CA has free-rein to hold funding hostage from its own cities. This abuse of power should be struck down at all levels. California almost certainly has the legal means to do so. The federal executive branch does not. <cite>Questionmarktarius posted [p:890821403] in Federal ju... [t:76016419]...</cite> <quote><cite>Polycosm posted...</cite> <quote>I'm skeptical of the logic that the Federal gov't isn't allowed to withhold funds from CA, yet CA has free-rein to hold funding hostage from its own cities. This abuse of power should be struck down at all levels.</quote> California almost certainly has the legal means to do so. The federal executive branch does not.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2

Current Events > Federal judge blocks Trump's move to defund sanctuary cities (+) Yeah! (+)

Current Events > Federal judge blocks Trump's move to defund sanctuary cities