User Panel
Posted: 1/26/2017 10:50:43 AM EDT
So what would prevent him from having the DOJ arrest them for ignoring Federal laws?
|
|
Isn't it due to the fact that each state is a sovereign body, and they can make their own rules?
The most he can do is cut federal funding to their states. But I'm no civics teacher, so... |
|
There's nothing stopping the feds from arresting mayors if they break a law. It's happened many times. The question is, are they breaking a law? I think that case could be made. If someone wants to pay me to research it and develop a plan, I would be happy to.
|
|
Quoted:
Isn't it due to the fact that each state is a sovereign body, and they can make their own rules? The most he can do is cut federal funding to their states. But I'm no civics teacher, so... View Quote They can't make their own immigration laws. They can legalize marijuana, for instance, but that doesn't affect whether a federal crime is still being committed, even within that state. |
|
Quoted:
Isn't it due to the fact that each state is a sovereign body, and they can make their own rules? The most he can do is cut federal funding to their states. But I'm no civics teacher, so... View Quote If he does this, there will be epic whining, butthurt, crying, begging, and then they will all fall in line while calling Trump Hitler for compelling them to enforce the law. Its going to be glorious. |
|
Nothing, if they are breaking an actual law. If he really wanted to fuck with them, arrest a group of them on RICO charges.
|
|
|
Quoted:
Isn't it due to the fact that each state is a sovereign body, and they can make their own rules? The most he can do is cut federal funding to their states. But I'm no civics teacher, so... View Quote Immigration policy is federal per the Constitution. States have no authority to alter it. One might argue that a local government aids and abets immigration violators by sanctuary city policy, otherwise that the city interferes with federal investigations or obstructs justice. Think about that, though. No one really wants to go down that road. Funding cuts are a better way. |
|
Send in the US Marshals, deputize a few reputable citizens and get on with it.......
|
|
Aiding and abetting criminal acts?
That's what I would do, but IANAL. Or you could do what our governor is doing and ask the legislature to pass a law giving you the authority to remove office holders violate/ignore federal law. To be fair, that concerns me, the whole don't pass laws that can be used against you later thing. Aiding and abetting already exists, just need the DOJ to charge and then remove from office pending conviction. |
|
I was going to say cut federal funding across the board would be the worst punishment.
|
|
What crime have they committed? I think there's a lower court decision saying that the local cops don't have to enforce federal law but I'd have to look for it
|
|
If Pres. Trump decided to get serious it would stop sanctuary cities as well as the hiring of illegal aliens tomorrow. All it would take would be arresting and prosecuting the Chicago Mayor and City Council or start smaller (less resources) and at the same time perp walk the Board of Directors and CEO of say Purdue.
https://www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-1907-title-8-usc-1324a-offenses 1907. Title 8, U.S.C. 1324(a) Offenses
Title 8, U.S.C. § 1324(a) defines several distinct offenses related to aliens. Subsection 1324(a)(1)(i)-(v) prohibits alien smuggling, domestic transportation of unauthorized aliens, concealing or harboring unauthorized aliens, encouraging or inducing unauthorized aliens to enter the United States, and engaging in a conspiracy or aiding and abetting any of the preceding acts. Subsection 1324(a)(2) prohibits bringing or attempting to bring unauthorized aliens to the United States in any manner whatsoever, even at a designated port of entry. Subsection 1324(a)(3). Alien Smuggling -- Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(i) makes it an offense for any person who -- knowing that a person is an alien, to bring to or attempts to bring to the United States in any manner whatsoever such person at a place other than a designated port of entry or place other than as designated by the Commissioner, regardless of whether such alien has received prior official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States and regardless of any future official action which may be taken with respect to such alien. Domestic Transporting -- Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii) makes it an offense for any person who -- knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, transports, or moves or attempts to transport or move such alien within the United States by means of transportation or otherwise, in furtherance of such violation of law. Harboring -- Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(iii) makes it an offense for any person who -- knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation. Encouraging/Inducing -- Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv) makes it an offense for any person who -- encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law. Conspiracy/Aiding or Abetting -- Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(v) expressly makes it an offense to engage in a conspiracy to commit or aid or abet the commission of the foregoing offenses. Bringing Aliens to the United States -- Subsection 1324(a)(2) makes it an offense for any person who -- knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has not received prior authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, to bring to or attempts to bring to the United States in any manner whatsoever, such alien, regardless of any official action which may later be taken with respect to such alien. The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA), enacted on September 30, 1996, added a new 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(3)(A) which makes it an offense for any person, during any 12-month period, to knowingly hire at least 10 individuals with actual knowledge that these individuals are unauthorized aliens. See this Manual at 1908 (unlawful employment of aliens). Unit of Prosecution -- With regard to offenses defined in subsections 1324(a)(1)(A)(i)-(v), (alien smuggling, domestic transporting, harboring, encouraging/inducing, or conspiracy/aiding or abetting) each alien with respect to whom a violation occurs constitutes a unit of prosecution. Prior to enactment of the IIRIRA, the unit of prosecution for violations of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(2) was each transaction, regardless of the number of aliens involved. However, the unit of prosecution is now based on each alien in respect to whom a violation occurs. Knowledge -- Prosecutions for alien smuggling, 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(i) require proof that defendant knew that the person brought to the United States was an alien. With regard to the other violations in 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a), proof of knowledge or reckless disregard of alienage is sufficient. Penalties -- The basic statutory maximum penalty for violating 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(i) and (v)(I) (alien smuggling and conspiracy) is a fine under title 18, imprisonment for not more than 10 years, or both. With regard to violations of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(ii)-(iv) and (v)(ii), domestic transportation, harboring, encouraging/inducing, or aiding/abetting, the basic statutory maximum term of imprisonment is 5 years, unless the offense was committed for commercial advantage or private financial gain, in which case the maximum term of imprisonment is 10 years. In addition, significant enhanced penalties are provided for in violations of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1) involving serious bodily injury or placing life in jeopardy. Moreover, if the violation results in the death of any person, the defendant may be punished by death or by imprisonment for any term of years. The basic penalty for a violation of subsection 1324(a)(2) is a fine under title 18, imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(2)(A). Enhanced penalties are provided for violations involving bringing in criminal aliens, 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(2)(B)(i), offenses done for commercial advantage or private financial gain, 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(2)(B)(ii), and violations where the alien is not presented to an immigration officer immediately upon arrival, 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(2)(B)(iii). A mandatory minimum three year term of imprisonment applies to first or second violations of § 1324(a)(2)(B)(i) or (B)(ii). Further enhanced punishment is provided for third or subsequent offenses. View Quote |
|
Sic AG Jeff Sessions on em.
Oh wait, he's still not confirmed yet. |
|
In the case of NY I think the entire state should be cut off financially since Cumhole is the governor and he approves of the sanctuary cities in his state.
|
|
Pretty sure local and state authorities are under no obligation to enforce federal laws.
|
|
Quoted:
So what would prevent him from having the DOJ arrest them for ignoring Federal laws? View Quote Is there a law that says Mayors must turn over illegals? So what law are they actually breaking when there is not? If you kid is a druggie, are you going to get arrested for not turning them in? |
|
I really, really hope there is no possible legal mechanism by which any president could to this.
|
|
|
The funny and ironic thing is that the recent Obama v. Arizona immigration case decision sets legal precedent that helps Trump. When it come to immigration, the Feds rule supreme. Live by the book, die by the book fuckers.
|
|
Simple, he can't. The president has no authority to arrest people. Unless he did a citizens arrest and that would really make hippies heads pop.
|
|
I've been involved with an opposite scenario. Where local authorities arrest a fed for having a concealed weapon in their jurisdiction. Of course that is allowed by federal law. But what do you do when they say, fuck you, too bad?
|
|
Power of the purse.
Arresting them would be a bad precedent. What if Herr Hitlery was elected and decided to arrest governors and mayors? We'd be screaming fascist! |
|
Quoted:
Pretty sure local and state authorities are under no obligation to enforce federal laws. View Quote That was not the question, the questions was can they be prosecuted for violating Federal Law and the answer is yes. They are knowingly harboring illegal aliens. The law btw I posted above was signed by Bill Clinton. |
|
Quoted:
What crime have they committed? I think there's a lower court decision saying that the local cops don't have to enforce federal law but I'd have to look for it View Quote There is "not enforcing" and then there is "actively obstructing". I guess that ignoring federal immigration hold orders would count as obstructing. |
|
18 USC 3 -
Whoever, knowing that an offense against the United States has been committed, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial or punishment, is an accessory after the fact. Except as otherwise expressly provided by any Act of Congress, an accessory after the fact shall be imprisoned not more than one-half the maximum term of imprisonment or (notwithstanding section 3571) fined not more than one-half the maximum fine prescribed for the punishment of the principal, or both; or if the principal is punishable by life imprisonment or death, the accessory shall be imprisoned not more than 15 years. |
|
Quoted:
What crime have they committed? I think there's a lower court decision saying that the local cops don't have to enforce federal law but I'd have to look for it View Quote seriously? YOu can think of no laws violated by knowingly harboring illegal aliens? What do you do for a living? |
|
Quoted:
Power of the purse. Arresting them would be a bad precedent. What if Herr Hitlery was elected and decided to arrest governors and mayors? We'd be screaming fascist! View Quote That's totally different. It's okay when we do it, but shit ourselves when the other side does it. Remember when Saddam took power, him on stage and the little purge? It's recently occured to me that many here would support and love such an act by the new POTUS. |
|
Quoted:
In the case of NY I think the entire state should be cut off financially since Cumhole is the governor and he approves of the sanctuary cities in his state. View Quote Ahh...I can dream can't I? |
|
|
Because there is no legally defined penalty for being a sanctuary city. The only thing they can do is withhold federal grant funds because, as a condition of receiving the grant funds, the recipient must certify that they are in compliance with all federal laws.
|
|
Quoted:
That was not the question, the questions was can they be prosecuted for violating Federal Law and the answer is yes. They are knowingly harboring illegal aliens. The law btw I posted above was signed by Bill Clinton. View Quote Nobody is protecting/harboring them from Feds. Feds can come in any times they want and enforce the laws. No law says local gov has to do the work for Feds. Why do you think there are states with "legalized" marijuana? Same legal mechanism. |
|
Quoted:
What crime have they committed? I think there's a lower court decision saying that the local cops don't have to enforce federal law but I'd have to look for it View Quote If by "lower court" you mean SCOTUS, you're right. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printz_v._United_States |
|
Quoted:
Immigration policy is federal per the Constitution. States have no authority to alter it. One might argue that a local government aids and abets immigration violators by sanctuary city policy, otherwise that the city interferes with federal investigations or obstructs justice. Think about that, though. No one really wants to go down that road. Funding cuts are a better way. View Quote Then how does a state like Cali alter their 2A laws? This whole system is out of control. |
|
Arresting mayors is a step I'm not real hot to see POTUS taking, no matter the politics or personalities involved.
But there's plenty that Trump could do with nothing more than a memo. Hell, just rescinding DoJ and BATFE recognition of the CPD as law enforcement entities would cause chaos. No more federal database access, no more cool SWAT toys.... |
|
Quoted:
seriously? YOu can think of no laws violated by knowingly harboring illegal aliens? What do you do for a living? View Quote Simply refusing to enforce federal law is not "harboring illegal aliens," no matter how much you wish it to be so. The mayors themselves have committed no crime. That doesn't mean that they will be without consequences. |
|
|
|
Quoted:
They can't make their own immigration laws. They can legalize marijuana, for instance, but that doesn't affect whether a federal crime is still being committed, even within that state. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Isn't it due to the fact that each state is a sovereign body, and they can make their own rules? The most he can do is cut federal funding to their states. But I'm no civics teacher, so... They can't make their own immigration laws. They can legalize marijuana, for instance, but that doesn't affect whether a federal crime is still being committed, even within that state. So the states can "legalize" marijuana (even though it is still against Federal Law) , Guess Federal Law doesn't apply to any States within the so called "United States of America" Does that mean that Texas could just say "Screw N.F.A. - Machine Guns for anybody who wants one!!!"... Oh Please Oh Please OH PLEASE!!!! |
|
Quoted:
There's nothing stopping the feds from arresting mayors if they break a law. It's happened many times. The question is, are they breaking a law? I think that case could be made. If someone wants to pay me to research it and develop a plan, I would be happy to. View Quote These mayors and city councils are therefore aiding, abetting, and harboring fugitives from federal prosecution...to enhance their voting block and any additional federal funds obtained by virtue of having a larger population. One of the predicate acts to qualify for prosecution under RICO is bringing in, aiding or assisting aliens in illegally entering the country (if the action was for financial gain). Seems their stance fits that predicate. I would be very curious to know if, past the aiding and abetting charges and harboring charges that could be brought, they could be prosecuted under the RICO statutes. |
|
Quoted:
Nobody is protecting/harboring them from Feds. Feds can come in any times they want and enforce the laws. No law says local gov has to do the work for Feds. Why do you think there are states with "legalized" marijuana? Same legal mechanism. View Quote A "sanctuary city" is not acting in a manner that is "protecting/harboring them from Feds?" A.W.D. |
|
Quoted:
Simply refusing to enforce federal law is not "harboring illegal aliens," no matter how much you wish it to be so. The mayors themselves have committed no crime. That doesn't mean that they will be without consequences. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Simply refusing to enforce federal law is not "harboring illegal aliens," no matter how much you wish it to be so. The mayors themselves have committed no crime. That doesn't mean that they will be without consequences. If all they were doing was simply refusing to enforce federal law, you might have a point. But, I know, you will stand against the vulgar populism of the mango messiah regardless. Harboring -- Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(iii) makes it an offense for any person who -- knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation.
Encouraging/Inducing -- Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv) makes it an offense for any person who -- encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law. Conspiracy/Aiding or Abetting -- Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(v) expressly makes it an offense to engage in a conspiracy to commit or aid or abet the commission of the foregoing offenses. you could make the case, unless the god emperor trump has already dissolved the courts and has instituted total control of the Reichstag already. |
|
Quoted:
So the states can "legalize" marijuana (even though it is still against Federal Law) , Guess Federal Law doesn't apply to any States within the so called "United States of America" Does that mean that Texas could just say "Screw N.F.A. - Machine Guns for anybody who wants one!!!"... Oh Please Oh Please OH PLEASE!!!! View Quote Wasn't their a state that just did something similar to this? I think they said if a silencer was made in their state, it didn't have to be registered with the NFA? I'm pretty sure the original context of the USA was that each state could do their own thing, if you didn't like what that state did, either change it, or move to a state that was more in-line with your ideas/morals/beliefs. |
|
Quoted:
A "sanctuary city" is not acting in a manner that is "protecting/harboring them from Feds?" A.W.D. View Quote Are Feds in any way, shape or form prevented from coming into the city and rounding up the people? answer: no "Sanctuary city" GOP equivalent term of DNCs "assault weapons".....a purposely misleading terms used to trigger emotional response for political gain. |
|
So if I'm understanding this right, why arrest them?
We're basically moving towards a situation where federal funding is cut off to places which are actively seeking to attract illegal immigrants, correct? Why would I want that - funneling illegal immigrants to places where none of my federal tax money is going - to stop? Is that not more winning? |
|
Quoted:
If by "lower court" you mean SCOTUS, you're right. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printz_v._United_States View Quote It's ok for him to do that? |
|
Except being illegal or undocumented is not a criminal act. It's a civil infraction. Criminal aliens are a different matter, and Mayors have stated they will turn over immigrants charged with crimes. The District Attorneys I know are terrified because many of their percipient witnesses are bailing on court dates due to fear of deportation. It's a weird situation.
|
|
There's this whole legal construct called preemption or something. I forgot half of the shit I learned in law school. Basically the federal government can do whatever it wants.
|
|
|
Quoted:
What if guy a like Emanuel had a list of 100,000 people in Shitago who illegally owned brand new machine guns and refused to tell the Feds who those people were? It's ok for him to do that? View Quote Of course, unless you can cite a law that imposes a legal duty upon him to report such information to the feds. |
|
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.