• 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!

Which side are you on concerning Sanctuary cities?

Which side are you on?

  • Total voters
    81
Josie

Josie

*probably reading smut*
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
57,629
Reaction score
32,177
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
President Trump says he will punish cities who don't comply with immigration laws -- some mayors of sanctuary cities are vowing to defy the President's order.

Which side are you on?
 
We're a nation of laws not men.

As a naturalized citizen who did things the proper legal way, I dispise illegals and hate that I bear their stigma.
 
Josie said:
President Trump says he will punish cities who don't comply with immigration laws -- some mayors of sanctuary cities are vowing to defy the President's order.

Which side are you on?
Click to expand...

I side with Trump on this. No state or city should be aiding illegals period.
 
The Obama DoJ and SCOTUS made it REALLY clear that immigration law enforcement was the exclusive territory of the federal government so that means that as much as Obama and the Democrats wanted to "interpret" the laws the Trump administration gets to enforce the laws.
 
Lutherf said:
The Obama DoJ and SCOTUS made it REALLY clear that immigration law enforcement was the exclusive territory of the federal government so that means that as much as Obama and the Democrats wanted to "interpret" the laws the Trump administration gets to enforce the laws.
Click to expand...

Correct, kinda coming back to haunt some. So trump will need to have Feds in place rounding up illegals across the Nation, unfortunately Congress has already said NO to that.
 
I feel like I'm always somewhere in between. Why, you may ask? Because there hasn't been a true oppressor since Segregation and Adolf Hitler... (which is a good thing)
 
Casper said:
Correct, kinda coming back to haunt some. So trump will need to have Feds in place rounding up illegals across the Nation, unfortunately Congress has already said NO to that.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that the 287(g) program is still functioning but now we'll probably see ICE sign more MOA's.
 
Lutherf said:
I'm pretty sure that the 287(g) program is still functioning but now we'll probably see ICE sign more MOA's.
Click to expand...

Possibly, but then again they are the Feds and it is their job, not that of the States.
 
I am somewhere in between.

On one hand, I do think law enforcement at the state and local level should be cooperating with the feds in regards to enforcing immigration laws.

On the other hand, I don't want a system where woman that has overstayed her visa will not call the police when her boyfriend is beating the **** out of her because she is afraid they will deport her.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
I am somewhere in between.

On one hand, I do think law enforcement at the state and local level should be cooperating with the feds in regards to enforcing immigration laws.

On the other hand, I don't want a system where woman that has overstayed her visa will not call the police when her boyfriend is beating the **** out of her because she is afraid they will deport her.
Click to expand...

So you don't want our illegal immigration laws enforced so that illegals can be comfortable to call people who should be enforcing the law?
 
Somewhere in between.

I do think those who commit felonies in this country serve the sentence in this country. I do think felons need to be turned over to the proper authorities (though States prosecute far more felonies than the Feds. I reckon once the felons have served their time they can be turned over to the Feds.

Everyone else shouldn't be a concern of the Feds and I support shielding the law abiding people from unwarranted search, the concept of sanctuary city works for me. I see no need for locals to do the feds work of determining citizenship status. Criminals are one thing, people just trying to earn a living another.

I kinda believe the old saying huddled masses yearning to breathe free... :peace
 
jamesrage said:
So you don't want our illegal immigration laws enforced so that illegals can be comfortable to call people who should be enforcing the law?
Click to expand...
Different Enforcers. You Miss that?
 
Casper said:
Different Enforcers. You Miss that?
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter if its police or border agents.It is law enforcement's job to remove trespassers.
 
jamesrage said:
It doesn't matter if its police or border agents.It is law enforcement's job to remove trespassers.
Click to expand...

That is not what they are charged with, learn the law first and then post.
 
I predict that this is headed to SCOTUS, and that the federal government prevails.
 
Casper said:
Possibly, but then again they are the Feds and it is their job, not that of the States.
Click to expand...

The 287(g) creates a partnership between the feds and state or local law enforcement at the option of the federal government so, effectively, expanding the program would not violate the supremacy clause.
 
I believe power should be as localized as possible. Local governments should not be required to enforce state and federal laws and state governments should not be required to enforce federal laws. That is why each has their own law enforcement agencies.

Now, the lower level governments should comply with all court orders for action and they shouldn't be able to actively stop federal law enforcement officers from doing their jobs.

But all that said, state government can withhold state funds from local governments and the federal government can withold federal funds from state and local governments who decide not to cooperate. They aren't entitled to that money so I am fine with there being strings attached.

So sanctuary cities need to decide if their autonomy is worth giving up that money. Some can afford it more than others. And if the residents don't like how it is handled they will make it known at the voting booth.
 
Casper said:
That is not what they are charged with, learn the law first and then post.
Click to expand...
Her visa expired,she is no longer a guest.She is a trespasser.
 
If local states and cities ignored or actively worked against the federal government in regards to regulations with the environment, taxes, firearms, drugs, or abortion it would be met with derision and scorn.

Nothing different here with Immigration. I am in favor of state rights, but there is a level of superiority on the part of the federal government. So long as the laws and actions are within the scope of the federal government and within their jurisdiction, they should be followed by the states/cities rather than openly attempting to circumvent or mute the Federal government.
 
I find it fascinating that the Right's professed support for local control vaporized as soon as Trump took office.
 
Phys251 said:
I find it fascinating that the Right's professed support for local control vaporized as soon as Trump took office.
Click to expand...

I don't think the "right" supports illegal activity of the cities or states. You confuse states rights with harboring illegals under an ideological morality. You provide a false choice coupled with mutually exclusive false narrative. Well done.
 
Phys251 said:
I find it fascinating that the Right's professed support for local control vaporized as soon as Trump took office.
Click to expand...

So you think immigration laws should be up to the states? How would that work?
 
What assistance are the sanctuary cities not providing which help is needed by the feds to do it's job of immigration enforcement when is Melania going to conduct the promised press conference to explain why she was not illegally in the United States as a model
 
I live in Chicago and this city is in no shape to lose any kind of funding, Federal or otherwise. Our dumb ass mayor screws the pooch every chance he gets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom