House passes bill to punish sanctuary cities in wake of Steinle killing

Posted by $ AJAshinoff 9 years, 9 months ago to Politics
38 comments | Share | Flag

About time things like this started happening, about 15 years overdue if you ask me. Still, I'm certain the House can rely on the Senate to stall this bit of sensible information; this is, unless Trump chimes in on it.
SOURCE URL: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/23/house-passes-bill-punish-sanctuary-cities/


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by freedomforall 9 years, 9 months ago
    "The White House vowed to veto the bill, insisting that President Obama’s deportation amnesty and enforcement priorities announced in November are better approaches to illegal immigration than trying to browbeat reluctant holdout jurisdictions to report illegal immigrants."

    The law passed by con-gress is being ignored by the POTUS.
    Impeach.
    Call O before con-gress and place him under arrest for contempt.
    Jail the looting traitor in a cell with a few hundred of the criminals he protects.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 9 years, 9 months ago
    No one is above the law... er... um... except the president... and sanctuary cities... and progressive, liberal candidates that keep government documents on their own servers... or race baiters like Sharpton that owe the IRS millions... hmmm... shorten that to Liberals.
    O will veto and the blood will be on his hands and the spineless in congress that will not join to over-ride. Strange how the administration claims immigration as their federal responsibility, fails miserably, sues States and municipalities that try to help and then assists and protects sanctuary cities that break the law.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Zenphamy 9 years, 9 months ago
    I find it amazing that so many that seem to favor the state's refusal to follow Fed law in the imposition of gun control, NSA support, and even immigration controls, seem to find much favor in the ideas of punishing cities that are refusing to follow those same sets of Fed laws.

    Consistency is important to principles--but apparently not so much for certain beliefs.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by jsw225 9 years, 9 months ago
      Because of the Hypocrisy inherent in all of liberalism. The constitution is very explicit when it comes to Immigration and other topics, like the 2nd Amendment. Concerning Immigration, the constitution makes it very clear that the only power the federal government has is for Congress to set Immigration Policy. No more. No less. Congress sets the rules. Not the President, not the states. Congress.

      Then comes along a State that recognizes the explicit rules Congress sets out, and gives themselves the authority to follow those explicit rules. Since the Constitution does not grant the Federal Government exclusive authority to enforce these rules, thus the State's law is explicitly constitutional. But they got sued, and the law overturned.

      On the other hand, you have States and Cities that become "Sanctuaries" against the rules set forth by congress, thus are EXPLICITLY unconstitutional. These laws and cities are allowed to exist.

      There is nothing unconstitutional about trying to enforce the rules set forth by congress. There is with ignoring it. Thus, the hypocrisy inherent in all of Liberalism.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 9 months ago
    Being in an area with low low wifi it takes a while to get all the infomation when it comes as at text headline and then a u tube type presentation. It doees give me a perspective less emotional and more objective given the realities.

    House passed and Senate passed now lt's see if they will over ride or if Obeyme will cave?

    Then look to see if the border patrols are increased, if the handling of those apprehended is changed or is it still catch and release? Is the border stil lthe border or is there a free zone for rock throwing and safe fence climbing?

    Remember Polly Klass? What did that State do to protect it's citizens?

    Will it make a difference to the voters?

    One can always hope.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 9 months ago
    Sanctuary for illegals? No brainer. The border is a federal responsibility. City and State law has nothing to do with it. The term is meaningless. For that matter Posse Comitatus has nothing to do with protecting the national borders. if you don't like the law change it...legally it's called the amendment procedure.If you aren't wiling to do that go back to sleep.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 9 years, 9 months ago
      "Sanctuary for illegals? No brainer. The border is a federal responsibility. City and State law has nothing to do with it."

      Untrue. The Constitution says all power comes from the people, that we elevate certain people to be leaders of our states, and that additional people are elevated to a federal level to handle matters common to all the states as a unified body.

      Therefore, if the fed gov fails to do its mandated job, its up to the state to carry out the citizens will, if the state fails in its responsibility the power to defend is on the rightful owners of this land and origin of authority at any level, the American people.

      It is the fed gov responsibility but only because that responsibility is given to them by the states. Fundamentally we have no government if all the laws of this nation are not being kept or enforced.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 9 months ago
        Let's try this again in small words. Constitution as much of it is left that evryone loves to quote but couldn't bother to protect and defend made national borders a federal level responsibility. Violation of those borders is not a city, county, or state law. Giving sanctuary federeal law breakers may be a Walden Pond u tube form of protest by some but it means nothing. The responsbility was given to the federal government vbythe Constitution . having said that for the last time with the Patriot Act replacing the bill of rights with no rights the Constiution is a a moot point. The people did not rise up in protest for the laset three major election cycles and voted to retain the left wing fascists in power else how did Bush II get elected the second time and Obama twice? both of whom implelmented and strengthened the Patriot Act provision? Fundamentally there is no Constitution. Unless you are willing to start a counter revolution and not even the military is willing to uphold it's oath of office and do it legally - by the old constitutiton. did General Ramsey get called on the carpet for his statement?

        In so far as border protection is concerned the feds now have the bvorder patrol doing paperwork and crossing point customs and immigration work. the military is not being used in support of the federal border responsibility they are bing stood down and trained for civil insurrection.

        I do believe they don't believe the country is worth the effort given the results of the elections. And people like Ramsey are in control at the top.

        Either way posse comitatus doesn't apply and the federal government has plenty of manpower for border patrol duty.

        how this latest congressional move will play out remains to be seen but I see it as nothing more than an assertion of federal supremacy using a case where it is correct as a reminder whose in charge - after all someone voted them into office on mulitiple occasions.

        The rest is just a discussion of history. People get what they ask for and guaranteed the cities or tates that try this sancturary business will go out and vote for the same people next time in another meaningless except as a show of support for the Government Party.

        Just think of it as one big scripted street theatrer production. Next episode another meaningless candidate shoved into the arena and then slaughtered. in the end - zero change.

        The production is gettng boring. I'll tune in again next season and click the channel once again after the first fie minutes.

        Jack Bauer for President! Better acting and better script writers.

        .
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by strugatsky 9 years, 9 months ago
    Why are this gal's parents upset at anyone else but themselves? They are ultra-liberal socialists, as was their daughter; they support the policies that have inevitably led to the killing, so why are they upset? Oh, perhaps because they were OK with someone else being killed, but felt isolated enough not to worry? Oh, well..
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 9 months ago
    If the bill passes the Senate, and Obama vetoes it -- that can be a good thing. The right side has not had enough really good causes that people understand until this one. It will be the time to show outrage, to demonstrate to view with alarm. Make people so aware that the words "Sanctuary City" will become anathema.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 9 years, 9 months ago
    I am not so sure I even agree with the illegal immigrant classification in the first place. Why are we restricting free flow of people in or out? Citizenship is different. It has to do with joining with a tribe for certain common goals like defense. Just coming here to work doesn't bestow citizenship and shouldn't. It's complicated to be sure but what we are doing with ibama path to citizenship (to be able to vote socialist) isn't the right way.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 9 years, 9 months ago
      They violate our laws and deserve nothing, not even a place in our society. Its an issue of private property. The issue isn't complicated at all: North of the border is private and reserved for American citizens, We control who may enter our land and take a place at our table. Anyone who breaks-in is a law breaker and deserves jail time and deportation no matter how long they've been here or what good they've done while here. If there isn't a border we do not have a country.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Zenphamy 9 years, 9 months ago
        AJ; I don't mean to be insulting or tactless, but I'd like to proffer another view. I've read your work, and I enjoyed it. You have a great talent that I envy and I'm glad you're a citizen here, producing and able to be involved on this site.

        But the name Ashinoff apparently originated in Russia and in 1930, there were only 10 people in this country by that name of which 5 were foreign born and 5 were 1st generation and by 1940, that number had grown to 24. The 30's in Russia was the time in which Stalin began the forced famines of at least the Ukrainians and much of his murder regime throughout the rest of the country killing tens of millions of his own citizens, even more than Hitler. So apparently, your family left during an appropriate time and must have worked pretty hard at that time (Depression and before the Welfare State) in this country to survive and prosper.

        My ancestors include people here before Columbus and the Pilgrims, another group here before the Revolution, and other groups that immigrated before immigration records existed.

        The vast majority of those coming across our Southern borders called Mexicans, Central Americans, and Latin American are in fact more Native American Indians than anything else. Few of those with strong Spanish, French, or German backgrounds are interested or need to immigrate or even sneak into the US.

        I'm not suggesting that some kind of line should be drawn or that one group or origins deserves any more status than any other. But I will state that our problems are not because of the people coming across the border, it's what the progressive/statist/liberal-democrats and even conservatives (that fool, Reagan's Amnesty) have set up for them--the welfare state (FDR and LBJ) and the 'War On Drugs' from that great man, Nixon.

        It's a very simple equation. Shutoff the sugar-tit of welfare and billions from drugs. Those that aren't here to work will fail or go home. Some of them will work and become productive. That is the only thing that will ever work. Find a path to a country of liberty and free markets with absolutely NO money from government for anything. No more DHS, no more TSA, no more immigration checkpoints 100 miles from the entire border covering 80% of the population of this country.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ 9 years, 9 months ago
          I take no offense whatever. Even so, even with the unlawful mentality and practices of our government, those coming here illegally do not deserve any favor or status. My family came here properly (you actually knew more about it than I did :) ) and worked for citizenship and to get where we are today (for better or for worse). I expect nothing less than anyone I encounter day to day in my life. Its not an immigrant issue, its a legality issue. As long as we have society there will be established rules. If we choose to ignore established rules and allow certain rules to be ignored for portions of the population ...
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by Zenphamy 9 years, 9 months ago
            No I don't agree with CA giving more driver's licenses this year to unlawful than citizens, and I don't agree with sanctuary cities or welfare, school, or medicine, or the baby of an unlawful getting citizenship--it's not them that needs stopping, it's the idiots in our government that needs stopping. We simply have to address the root of the problem, not the leaves that are falling and plugging up our gutters.

            Our government is no longer lawful. If the government is not lawful, how do we expect anyone else to be lawful. (rhetorical)

            But it brings up something that hadn't occurred to me before--where in the hell do cities that are going broke in a state that's going broke come up with money for welfare programs of their own?
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ 9 years, 9 months ago
              The US fed gov is certainly the root of the issue for not upholding the law.That does not negate the responsibility of millions of individuals who come across the border without permission. Whether they are the criminal element or not can only be determined once they are here and commit a crime. The vetting process for immigrants is OUR right as a nation and we are being denied that. The first story of Fallacies of Vision...mark my words.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by Zenphamy 9 years, 9 months ago
                I agree with your thoughts on vetting. In many prior years, immigrants were brought to Ellis Island, where they were kept until they could pass an interview and medical. I have no problem with that. Wasn't there a scare last year over some type of strange virus in Kansas (?) that had only previously been seen in Central or northern South America. That one got quieted up pretty quickly.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 9 years, 9 months ago
        that is the current thinking for sure. The whole private property thing is a bit distorted, however. I happened to have been born in the USA, so I am a citizen by birth. But if I (and some citizen friends) want to have a person who is not a citizen live on our property and work for us, shouldnt I be allowed to do that? Is private property really private, or does it belong somehow to the other "citizens". Its very confusing.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ 9 years, 9 months ago
          "they" can get a work permit with you as their sponsor.

          The nation being seen as private property isn't confusing at all. The American people have staked claim to the geography which constitutes the nation. The inside of those borders consists of states, which consists of individually own land. Collectively the 50 states are one large collection of land owned by the American people.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by term2 9 years, 9 months ago
            So then I don't really own anything here that isn't subject to the whims of "the American people". Any land I buy comes with covenants enforced by the government here
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ 9 years, 9 months ago
              What is it about this that you can't get? Each person owns his own property. Collectively those properties make up a town or city. A collections of towns make up a county. Combined all those parcels make up a state. Each state is one 50th of the nation. On a basic level everything, including the vacant land in between is America. And yes, you buy land here, in this nation or any other, you are bound by its boundaries and laws. Thats reality.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by term2 9 years, 9 months ago
                So if I come within the borders I must give up any rights , and obey the laws of the land; and if I buy land within the borders , I give up any property rights I might have that are deemed unlawful either before or after my purchase. I do GET it. But I don't think it's right
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by $ 9 years, 9 months ago
                  If you live within a defined country, state or town, unless you live apart from all mankind, you are subject to the rule of whatever society you reside. Reality. If you buy land within defined borders you are subject to the laws of that land. Reality. Sure, you don't have to like it but you could move to some remote area in Alaska and do whatever you wish, however you wish.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by term2 9 years, 9 months ago
                    We are subject to the laws of the land. True. Once you allow for that , you open the door to rule of the mob. Zoning board decisions, building codes, and thousands of other rules and regulations like we have now. Constantly increasing taxes to pay for socialism too. Biggest reasons to live in a halts gulch
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo