no propaganda please Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun

California Declares Itself a ‘Sanctuary State’ – Here’s How ICE Responded

You’ve heard of sanctuary cities, but Californians took things one step further and declared themselves a “sanctuary state” this fall. This bold move is meant to undermine the authority of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers and subvert Federal law entirely.

Essentially, the bluest state in the Union is rejecting the purpose of its own borders, and by extension nationhood as a core concept.

California already has sanctuary cities, which prevent local law enforcement from deporting those who are jailed for crimes. These cities also ban local government officials and all employees from cooperating with ICE and other Federal agents who are working to deport i*****l a***ns.

Under sanctuary city rules, law enforcement can’t detain, investigate, question or arrest those i*****l a***ns living within the boundaries. In some limited circumstances, authorities are allowed to proceed, but this is exceedingly rare.

The state of California recently increased the scope and span of the idea of sanctuary, making it state wide and preventing officials from participating in deportation activities at all. While the state can’t forbid or stop federal officers from deporting i*****l a***ns or participating in activities designed to remove i*****l i*******ts from the country, the state can prevent local law enforcement from helping them do so.

The recent move by California does just that, state wide. Local, city, state and county law officers and employees are no longer allowed to assist or participate in the deportation of i*****l a***ns, making it easier for those in the country illegally to stay in California. The state sanctuary bill, also known as Senate Bill 54, wants to block local law enforcement from participating in deportation activities and severely restrict the way that they can cooperate with ICE and other Federal agencies.

According the Blaze, Riverside County Sheriff Stan Sniff described the dynamic like this: “If a checkpoint is conducted somewhere, we don’t invite them. But the reality is they can drop by any time they want.”

If Senate Bill 54 passes, both ICE and the United States Customs and Border Protection would have no cooperation from local law enforcement in California. That includes removing ICE and border patrol agents from local jails, and preventing them from accessing some state data and systems. It also bans state workers from asking about a person’s immigration or citizenship status at all.

The bill allows for some cooperation in specific instances that could later lead to deportation and does still allow Federal law enforcement to access fingerprint data for those actually arrested, but otherwise staunchly limits the role that law enforcement can play. Preventing Ice from accessing jails could result in more dangerous i*****l a***ns being released back into the U.S. after arrest or time served; these convicted criminals could then potentially commit more crimes in the country.

In a blistering statement released just after California’s announcement of their intention to interfere with law enforcement in the state, ICE director Tom Homan warned that his agency would have to expand their operations in the state.

“ICE will have no choice but to conduct at-large arrests in local neighborhoods and at worksites,” Homan’s statement read. “[the bill] will inevitably result in additional collateral arrests, instead of focusing on arrests at jails and prisons where t***sfers are safer for ICE officers and the community.”

A collateral arrest is one that occurs when an i*****l a***n is found with someone targeted for deportation by ICE. In many cases, ICE targets violent immigrants with criminal histories or warrants; i*****l a***ns found in the company of these wanted individuals could be detained as well. Since the secondary party was simply there by happenstance and not suspected of a crime beyond illegal entry, critics argue that collateral arrests should not be allowed.

The statement also warned that those detained by ICE would be moved from California to another state to await deportation; this would make it more difficult for families to see one another or get assistance when a deportation action is pending. Homan also felt that the sanctuary state bill would be detrimental to the safety of California residents and that the state would attract even more i*****l a***ns due to their stance on detention and deportation.

~ Conservative Zone

E

First we start with with holding federal money. Then go in and do what is necessary with mass sweeps and arrests and deportations as the article stated. Concentrate on California and the other Sanctuary state, Illinois.

Lonewolf

Lonewolf

let's get the Mormons next soon followed by the Italians and Irish and then, of course, all black or brown people oo don't forget the Asians
that will leave the red man who knew how to take care of this planet and live in peace

no propaganda please Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun

How about just getting rid of criminals? If you are implying that Mormons, Italians, Irish, black and brown people are all criminals, then you are the worst r****t that I have ever encountered. If not that then just a dupe of the Marxist socialist Soros run dictatorship.

padremike Loc: Phenix City, Al

It wouldn't be appropriate at this time to simply say "let them burn" would it. Yet they'll be screaming for Federal Aid.

E

Good point. I wanted to point out that many of these Californians live in the mountains in beautiful tinder boxes in an elite lifestyle, looking down on others. Gated communities, etc. Why is it when we look at the burned out houses, the chimney is always left standing? Maybe they should build the whole home in stone and cut down the underbrush in the area that provides most of the fire fuel. How about we tell them that the Federal Aid they will eventually ask for is in a Sanctuary and not available.

Seriously, not all Californians are wackoo l*****ts and I feel sorry for the good ones.

Holdenbeach4u Loc: Holden Beach , NC

I know California is burning up and it’s related to the hurricanes too ! It’s called HAARP! I know this statement does not apply to the Sanctuary State but I know its only the beginner of the weather conditions for the USA in the coming months and years to come! Wow

ExperienceCounts

Why doesn't someone start with challenging the new laws restricting and defying federal law to the Supreme Court? Can't those passing the laws be charged with aiding and abetting lawbreakers? Seems like a lot of those liberal judges are quick to challenge federal laws. Why aren't the state judges being challenged when they seek to gut federal law? Why isn't someone getting arrested for defying and breaking federal law? Why isn't the federal government challenging the state laws that seek to prevent adherence to federal law? Seems like there ought to be some way to arrest those aiding abetting the breaking of national laws since federal law trumps state law. Not a lawyer, someone care to explain to those of us who don't understand how a town, state, law enforcement officer, elected or appointed official can hinder a federal law enforcement officer or seek to protect someone breaking national law? For example at a traffic stop you cam be arrested for hindering an investigation if you voice opposition to someone being stopped as a person of interest. As a driver in a getaway car you are guilty of murder if a cohort k**ls someone in a bank...The husband or wife who gets locked up when they object when an abusing spouse gets arrested for interfering with a police officer in the performance of their duty when that spouse objects to the arrest.. Just saying..someone explain please. <This should be good.>