States Rights! States should have the right to have sanctuary cities. What is Trump thinking?
If he keeps this pressure up you are going to have states seceding over stuff like this! He has hit a hammer into a hornet's nest which is going to sting him incessantly. He has no idea what he is dealing with, especially in California which is about half Hispanic and other foreign nationalities who are relatively recent immigrants. Hispanics and others have outnumbered whites here for some time. What is he thinking?
Outside of defunding sanctuary cities Trump likely has no power to change the will of the people here in California unless he wants to bring in the national guard and have a war and then California will just secede for real. He has no idea what he has started but Californians will finish what they start and live their beliefs, just like Trump says he does. We are different but we are a free people with or without the rest of the U.S. We would prefer to be with the U.S. but Trump might just make us all leave just to keep our integrity and dignity.
Also, Trump has no Constitutional authority to enforce this order unless he is a dictator instead of a democratically elected president.
To see a video of what the Mayor of San Francisco Said in defending his sanctuary city (one of many many) click on word button two lines down:
begin quote from:
SAN
FRANCISCO ― One of President Donald Trump’s first major executive
actions on immigration policy is facing massive political blowback and
will almost certainly crash and burn under the Constitution once courts
begin to …
TRENDING
Donald Trump Declared War On ‘Sanctuary Cities.’ They’re Already Fighting Back.
The president signed an executive order Wednesday aimed at pressuring jurisdictions to work with him on deportations.
X
SAN
FRANCISCO ― One of President Donald Trump’s first major executive
actions on immigration policy is facing massive political blowback and
will almost certainly crash and burn under the Constitution once courts
begin to scrutinize the fine print.
During a visit to the Department of Homeland Security on Wednesday, Trump signed an executive order
aimed at strong-arming so-called “sanctuary cities” into cooperating
fully with his efforts to ramp up deportations. Threatening loss of
federal funding and using shaming tactics for localities that refuse to
comply, the order is styled as a call to obey existing immigration laws ―
even though immigration experts and civil liberties groups are doubtful
Trump even has the constitutional authority to enforce it.
Independent
of the ultimate legality of the executive order, politicians from those
sanctuary cities say they aren’t budging, and legal advocacy groups are
gearing up for the coming legal fight.
The
president is “in for one hell of a fight,” California state Sen. Scott
Weiner (D), who represents San Francisco, said in a statement.
Boston Mayor Marty Walsh (D) said his city “will not retreat one inch”
from its policy against holding undocumented immigrants it otherwise
would not hold based on requests from Immigration and Customs
Enforcement, and Seattle Mayor Ed Murray said his city “will not be intimidated
by federal dollars and ... will not be intimidated by the authoritative
message from this administration.” San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee (D) said
“nothing has changed” in his city, noting the lack of specifics in
Trump’s order.
“We
are going to fight this, and cities and states around the country are
going to fight this,” New York Mayor Bill de Blasio (D) said at a press conference Wednesday.
New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman (D) already began hinting at a legal challenge, releasing a statement
that Trump lacks the constitutional authority for his executive order
and that he will do “everything in [his] power” to push back if the
president does not rescind it.
Washington state Attorney
General Bob Ferguson (D) also warned of potential legal challenges to
come, saying in a statement that the order “raises
significant legal issues that my office will be investigating closely
to protect the constitutional and human rights of the people of our
state.”
There’s
no exact definition of “sanctuary city.” Places like San Francisco and
New York use the term broadly to refer to their immigrant-friendly
policies, but more generally the term is applied to cities and counties
that do not reflexively honor all of Immigration and Customs
Enforcement’s requests for cooperation. Many of these localities do work
with ICE to detain and hand over immigrants suspected or convicted of
serious crimes, but they often release low-priority immigrants requested
by ICE if they have no other reason to hold them.
“The
reason that many local law enforcement officers don’t honor detainers
is because courts have said that they violate the Constitution, and if
they violate the Constitution, the localities are on the hook
financially,” said Cesar Cuauhtemoc Garcia Hernandez, a law professor at
the University of Denver who teaches on the intersection of criminal
law and immigration.
Just on Tuesday, a federal
court in Rhode Island joined several others that have ruled in recent
years that certain ICE detainers can violate people’s constitutional rights ― even those of U.S. citizens.
But Trump’s executive order
seems to overlook this legal reality, and instead frames sanctuary
cities with the alarmist rhetoric he used on the campaign trail.
Bloomberg via Getty Images
”Sanctuary
jurisdictions across the United States willfully violate Federal law in
an attempt to shield aliens from removal from the United States,” his
order declares. “These jurisdictions have caused immeasurable harm to
the American people and to the very fabric of our Republic.”
Thomas
Saenz, who heads the Mexican American Legal and Educational Defense
Fund, said that on paper the order wouldn’t give Trump the authority to
crack down on sanctuary cities, as Trump claimed.
“It’s
hot air, but it’s extremely dangerous hot air,” Saenz told The
Huffington Post. “It’s designed to intimidate community members.”
To
force sanctuary jurisdictions to hold detained immigrants at the behest
of ICE would require Congress to pass new legislation, but Congress in
2015 already rejected similar legislation, said Cecillia Wang, deputy
legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union and a specialist in
immigrants’ rights.
“The
federal government and specifically the president is trying to coerce
states and localities that have made the decision to protect
constitutional rights and provide services without regard to immigration
status,” she said.
“I’m
not sure what Trump thinks he’s doing that’s different,” Saenz said.
“The law is already being enforced. If they ― in practice or in intent ―
go beyond existing law, it would be subject to challenge as it’s beyond
his authority as president.”
As
legal twists would have it, the constitutional source for such a
challenge would be the Supreme Court’s landmark 2012 decision upholding
the Affordable Care Act, in which the court rebuked the federal
government for threatening loss of funding for states that refused to
expand their Medicaid programs under the law. In his majority opinion,
Chief Justice John Roberts said Congress couldn’t hold “a gun to the head” of the states.
Wang
echoed those words and said she’d be monitoring what consequences
befall sanctuary cities. “President Trump is holding a gun to their
heads and forcing them to comply with his priorities,” she said.
Justin Sullivan via Getty Images
But
in California, where immigrants make up roughly one-third of the
population, lawmakers said they aren’t waiting on challenges in court,
vowing to take the fight into their own hands.
In
a press conference Wednesday, state Senate President pro tempore Kevin
De León said the legislature will fast-track bills in response to
Trump’s orders, including a bill to prevent local law enforcement from using their resources for immigration enforcement.
“These
are spiteful and mean-spirited directives that will only instill fear
in the hearts of millions of people who pay taxes, contribute to our
economy and our way of life,” he said of the orders. “We will have no
part in their implementation.”
“We will not spend a single cent nor lift a finger to aid his efforts,” he added.
The legislature has already
taken several pre-emptive steps to combat Trump’s policies. In
December, the senate and assembly passed a resolution calling on Trump
to abandon his promise to deport millions of undocumented immigrants.
The chamber has also taken up a bill to establish a legal aid fund for
those facing deportation, as well as a bill to create training centers
to educate legal workers on immigration law.
“It’s
sad Donald Trump thinks these executive orders make America safer, and
it’s sad he thinks they make America,” said Assembly Speaker Anthony
Rendon in a statement.
“Today
is a shameful day for our country, but it only strengthens my resolve
to stand up against the alarming bigotry and hatred emanating from the
White House,” Weiner, the San Francisco state senator, said. “If
President Trump believes signing a piece of paper will for one second
change how San Francisco and California value and protect our immigrant
neighbors, he is underestimating our strength and spirit.”
Their statements came just one day after Gov. Jerry Brown (D) dedicated a portion of his State of the State address to praising the contributions of California’s immigrants, a clear rebuke of Trump’s worldview.
“Immigrants
are an integral part of who we are and what we’ve become,” he said.
“Let me be clear: We will defend everybody ― every man, woman and child
― who has come here for a better life and has contributed to the
well-being of our state.”
Mollie Reilly reported
from San Francisco; Cristian Farias reported from New York; Elise Foley
reported from Washington; and Roque Planas reported from Austin, Texas.
―
How will Trump’s first 100 days impact you? Sign up for our weekly newsletter and get breaking updates on Trump’s presidency by messaging us here.
No comments:
Post a Comment