• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Tennessee Town Becomes First To Pass ‘No Sanctuary’ Resolution

G

golferman

New member
Joined
Dec 7, 2016
Messages
7
Reaction score
19
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
MT. JULIET, Tennessee – On Monday officials in Mt. Juliet, Tennessee passed a resolution that states it is not a sanctuary city and denounces immigrants who are in the United States illegally.

“We encourage other cities to also go on the record saying they will not be a sanctuary city,” Mt. Juliet Vice-Mayor James Maness told NewsChannel 5. The commissioners declared Mt. Juliet a “rule of law” city which means it will not stop actions to enforce federal immigration laws within the city.

“As a city, we are not going to interfere or stop federal efforts. Sometimes you just kind of scratch your head why somebody would work so hard to impede the efforts to enforce our laws and secure our borders,” Maness added. https://resistancefeed.com/2016/12/07/tennessee-town-becomes-first-pass-no-sanctuary-resolution/​

It is interesting that, as the story points out, they received some backlash to this, when it's simply following U.S. laws and laws that virtually all other countries on earth have about immigrating and citizenship. It just baffles me that some people seem to think open borders is a good thing.
 
golferman said:
MT. JULIET, Tennessee – On Monday officials in Mt. Juliet, Tennessee passed a resolution that states it is not a sanctuary city and denounces immigrants who are in the United States illegally.

“We encourage other cities to also go on the record saying they will not be a sanctuary city,” Mt. Juliet Vice-Mayor James Maness told NewsChannel 5. The commissioners declared Mt. Juliet a “rule of law” city which means it will not stop actions to enforce federal immigration laws within the city.

“As a city, we are not going to interfere or stop federal efforts. Sometimes you just kind of scratch your head why somebody would work so hard to impede the efforts to enforce our laws and secure our borders,” Maness added. https://resistancefeed.com/2016/12/07/tennessee-town-becomes-first-pass-no-sanctuary-resolution/​

It is interesting that, as the story points out, they received some backlash to this, when it's simply following U.S. laws and laws that virtually all other countries on earth have about immigrating and citizenship. It just baffles me that some people seem to think open borders is a good thing.
Click to expand...
our town has civilian patrols. if we spot an illegal, we notify the authorities after they are given a "proper talkin to"
 
golferman said:
MT. JULIET, Tennessee – On Monday officials in Mt. Juliet, Tennessee passed a resolution that states it is not a sanctuary city and denounces immigrants who are in the United States illegally.

“We encourage other cities to also go on the record saying they will not be a sanctuary city,” Mt. Juliet Vice-Mayor James Maness told NewsChannel 5. The commissioners declared Mt. Juliet a “rule of law” city which means it will not stop actions to enforce federal immigration laws within the city.

“As a city, we are not going to interfere or stop federal efforts. Sometimes you just kind of scratch your head why somebody would work so hard to impede the efforts to enforce our laws and secure our borders,” Maness added. https://resistancefeed.com/2016/12/07/tennessee-town-becomes-first-pass-no-sanctuary-resolution/​

It is interesting that, as the story points out, they received some backlash to this, when it's simply following U.S. laws and laws that virtually all other countries on earth have about immigrating and citizenship. It just baffles me that some people seem to think open borders is a good thing.
Click to expand...

A bunch of grand standing politicians is all this is. It's a wealthy city outside of Nashville with a near zero population of Hispanics (about 1%) and I guess they felt the need to send out an gratuitous anti-illegal immigrant statement for some reason. I'm sure they'd have been disappointed if they didn't get a little pushback...
 
If a city or state wants to expend their resources enforcing federal law that is up to them. But it certainly shouldn't be required.
 
11Bravo said:
our town has civilian patrols. if we spot an illegal, we notify the authorities after they are given a "proper talkin to"
Click to expand...

LOL, right - are "illegals" required to wear a Scarlet I in your town? Otherwise it's unclear how "civilian patrols" can "spot an illegal."
 
JasperL said:
LOL, right - are "illegals" required to wear a Scarlet I in your town? Otherwise it's unclear how "civilian patrols" can "spot an illegal."
Click to expand...

they hang out by the home depot and wait to get picked up. thanks to the PAATI the illegals have been properly handled
 
11Bravo said:
they hang out by the home depot and wait to get picked up. thanks to the PAATI the illegals have been properly handled
Click to expand...

Of course they do.

And you guys can be identified by your white hoods right?
 
Jetboogieman said:
Of course they do.

And you guys can be identified by your white hoods right?
Click to expand...

no. we have official PAATI green uniforms similar to the ACU. our patrols have been approved by the sheriff
 
11Bravo said:
our town has civilian patrols. if we spot an illegal, we notify the authorities after they are given a "proper talkin to"
Click to expand...

How would you know someone was illegal?
 
BrewerBob said:
If a city or state wants to expend their resources enforcing federal law that is up to them. But it certainly shouldn't be required.
Click to expand...

It is required by federal law. Most sanctuary cities also sing an agreement that they will comply with the immigration laws to receive federal grants.
 
11Bravo said:
they hang out by the home depot and wait to get picked up. thanks to the PAATI the illegals have been properly handled
Click to expand...

That sounds like the Barney Fife brigade.

Don_Knotts_Barney_and_the_bullet_Andy_Griffith_Show.jpg
 
NonoBadDog said:
It is required by federal law. Most sanctuary cities also sing an agreement that they will comply with the immigration laws to receive federal grants.
Click to expand...

To the best of my knowledge there is no federal law that commands states to enforce federal laws. And what specific cases I do find that go to the courts support my assertion.

Now, states cannot prohibit federal law enforcement officers in their jurisdiction from enforcing federal laws. And your point about funds is valid. The federal government can pull federal funds if they want.

I'm certainly no lawyer so if you can point me to such a federal law then I will chance my stance on what the law is but not on what it should be.
 
JasperL said:
A bunch of grand standing politicians is all this is. It's a wealthy city outside of Nashville with a near zero population of Hispanics (about 1%) and I guess they felt the need to send out an gratuitous anti-illegal immigrant statement for some reason. I'm sure they'd have been disappointed if they didn't get a little pushback...
Click to expand...

It's a sad state of affairs that there are idiots in America that would give them pushback.
 
Last edited:
11Bravo said:
our town has civilian patrols. if we spot an illegal, we notify the authorities after they are given a "proper talkin to"
Click to expand...

Like sharia police.....nice.....
 
azgreg said:
Like sharia police.....nice.....
Click to expand...

is that the civilian patrol unit out in franklin county? we have a conference call with them
 
11Bravo said:
our town has civilian patrols. if we spot an illegal, we notify the authorities after they are given a "proper talkin to"
Click to expand...

Can you clarify "proper talking to"???
 
JANFU said:
Can you clarify "proper talking to"???
Click to expand...

we grab them and explain to them in a stern voice that what they are doing is not right and that they should apply for citizenship. we also scream the names of available tutors that can help them along the way.
 
golferman said:
MT. JULIET, Tennessee – On Monday officials in Mt. Juliet, Tennessee passed a resolution that states it is not a sanctuary city and denounces immigrants who are in the United States illegally.

“We encourage other cities to also go on the record saying they will not be a sanctuary city,” Mt. Juliet Vice-Mayor James Maness told NewsChannel 5. The commissioners declared Mt. Juliet a “rule of law” city which means it will not stop actions to enforce federal immigration laws within the city.

“As a city, we are not going to interfere or stop federal efforts. Sometimes you just kind of scratch your head why somebody would work so hard to impede the efforts to enforce our laws and secure our borders,” Maness added. https://resistancefeed.com/2016/12/07/tennessee-town-becomes-first-pass-no-sanctuary-resolution/​

It is interesting that, as the story points out, they received some backlash to this, when it's simply following U.S. laws and laws that virtually all other countries on earth have about immigrating and citizenship. It just baffles me that some people seem to think open borders is a good thing.
Click to expand...
Ridiculous and Pandering, townships are not the INS and unless law enforcement has just cause they cannot simply round people up because they are brown. Just as sanctuary cities are a dumb idea, this idea is every bit as dumb, but the sheep will go Yeah. :roll:
 
golferman said:
MT. JULIET, Tennessee – On Monday officials in Mt. Juliet, Tennessee passed a resolution that states it is not a sanctuary city and denounces immigrants who are in the United States illegally.

“We encourage other cities to also go on the record saying they will not be a sanctuary city,” Mt. Juliet Vice-Mayor James Maness told NewsChannel 5. The commissioners declared Mt. Juliet a “rule of law” city which means it will not stop actions to enforce federal immigration laws within the city.

“As a city, we are not going to interfere or stop federal efforts. Sometimes you just kind of scratch your head why somebody would work so hard to impede the efforts to enforce our laws and secure our borders,” Maness added. https://resistancefeed.com/2016/12/07/tennessee-town-becomes-first-pass-no-sanctuary-resolution/​

It is interesting that, as the story points out, they received some backlash to this, when it's simply following U.S. laws and laws that virtually all other countries on earth have about immigrating and citizenship. It just baffles me that some people seem to think open borders is a good thing.
Click to expand...

Hopefully other cities follow suit.
 
BrewerBob said:
To the best of my knowledge there is no federal law that commands states to enforce federal laws. And what specific cases I do find that go to the courts support my assertion.

Now, states cannot prohibit federal law enforcement officers in their jurisdiction from enforcing federal laws. And your point about funds is valid. The federal government can pull federal funds if they want.

I'm certainly no lawyer so if you can point me to such a federal law then I will chance my stance on what the law is but not on what it should be.
Click to expand...

I have to agree that there is no such federal law that compels a city to cooperate with enforcement of federal laws. It is illegal, however, to write a law that restricts local law enforcement personnel from communicating with federal authorities.

In General. Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal, State, or local law, a Federal, State, or local government entity or official may not prohibit, or in any way restrict, any' government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual.
Click to expand...
According to the legislative history contained in the House of Representatives Report, Section 1373 was intended "to give State and local officials the authority to communicate with the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) regarding the presence, whereabouts, and activities of illegal aliens. This section is designed to prevent any State or local law, ordinance, executive order, policy, constitutional provision, or decision of any Federal or State court that prohibits or in any way restricts any communication between State and local officials and the INS."4
Click to expand...

Here is where some cities are in conflict with Section 1373. This would be illegal for any city.
For example, the Cook County, Illinois, detainer policy states, "unless ICE agents have a criminal warrant, or County officials have a legitimate law enforcement purpose that is not related to the enforcement of immigration laws, ICE agents shall not be given access to individuals or allowed to use County facilities for investigative interviews or other purposes, and County personnel shall not expend their time responding to ICE inquiries or communicating with ICE regarding individuals' incarceration status or release dates while on duty." Although this policy falls under the heading "Section 4637 -Policy for responding to ICE Detainers" and does not explicitly proscribe sharing immigration status information with ICE, the portion of the prohibition relating to personnel expending their time responding to ICE inquiries could easily be read by Cook County officials and officers as more broadly prohibiting them from expending time responding to ICE requests relating to immigration status. This possibility was corroborated by ICE officials who told us that Cook County officials "won't even talk to us [ICE]."
Click to expand...
https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2016/1607.pdf
 
jamesrage said:
Hopefully other cities follow suit.
Click to expand...

You mean you hope other cities will have grandstanding politicians making pointless 'resolutions' that have no effect and are just grandstanding? I live in Tennessee and I don't hope my city wastes their time with such nonsense. State law in Tennessee requires ALL cities to comply with federal immigration efforts, so the resolution says, "we agree to follow the law that we have no choice but to follow."

Similarly, "I, JasperL, hereby resolve to comply with state law prohibiting murder and rape. Signed, this 7th day of December in the year of our Lord 2016." Can I get a cookie?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom