Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/19/2017 7:27:10 PM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 4/7/2006 10:49:46 AM EDT
www.examiner.com/Top_News-a70996~Mayor__City_would_ignore_legislation_if_it_were_to_pass.html


Mayor: City would ignore legislation if it were to pass

PDF | Email
Justin Jouvenal, The Examiner
Apr 7, 2006 9:00 AM (5 hrs ago)
SAN FRANCISCO - Mayor Gavin Newsom said Thursday that The City will not comply with any federal legislation that criminalizes efforts to help illegal immigrants.

The mayor also denounced a bipartisan congressional proposal that would beef up border security and allow as many as 12 million illegal immigrants to gain legal status.

Newsom, who has not been afraid to wade into controversial national issues such as gay marriage, appeared with a group of elected officials on the steps of City Hall to support immigrants, “documented as well as undocumented.”Newsom also signed a resolution sponsored by Supervisor Gerardo Sandoval, and passed unanimously by the Board of Supervisors, urging San Francisco law enforcement not to comply with criminal provisions of any new immigration bill.

“San Francisco stands foursquare in strong opposition to the rhetoric coming out of Washington, D.C.,” Newsom said. “If people think we were defiant on the gay marriage issue, they haven’t seen defiance.”

It is not the first time San Francisco has weighed in on the immigration issue. In 1989, the Board of Supervisors made San Francisco a “City of Refuge.” The ordinance forbids city resources from being used to enforce federal immigration laws or to gather or disseminate information regarding the status of residents of The City. The Board of Supervisors passed a resolution reaffirming the ordinance in January.

The bill at issue is H.R. 4437, a House measure that would make it a crime to be in the United States illegally or offer aid to illegal immigrants. It also would enlist military and law enforcement to help stop illegal immigration, require employers to verify the legal status of workers and build new fences along the U.S.-Mexico border.
Thursday’s press conference came shortly after a group of bipartisan U.S. senators announced they reached a compromise on their version of immigration legislation, which would not criminalize illegal immigration or assisting illeglal immigrants.

Newsom said he was disappointed with Democratic leaders for agreeing to the compromise and that he supported a more immigrant-friendly bill that was put forward by Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass, which was part of the basis of the compromise legislation.

Newsom and other city officials also derided U.S. House of Representatives bill 4437, which calls for building a 700-mile fence along the U.S.-Mexico border and criminalizing groups that provide aid to illegal immigrants.

“National-origin discrimination is the civil rights issue of our time,” said Rodel Rodis, a member of the City College board and an immigration attorney. “I could go to jail because of helping illegal immigrants.”
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 10:50:45 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 10:51:56 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Symtex:
www.examiner.com/Top_News-a70996~Mayor__City_would_ignore_legislation_if_it_were_to_pass.html


Mayor: City would ignore legislation if it were to pass

PDF | Email
Justin Jouvenal, The Examiner
Apr 7, 2006 9:00 AM (5 hrs ago)
SAN FRANCISCO - Mayor Gavin Newsom said Thursday that The City will not comply with any federal legislation that criminalizes efforts to help illegal immigrants.

The mayor also denounced a bipartisan congressional proposal that would beef up border security and allow as many as 12 million illegal immigrants to gain legal status.

Newsom, who has not been afraid to wade into controversial national issues such as gay marriage, appeared with a group of elected officials on the steps of City Hall to support immigrants, “documented as well as undocumented.”Newsom also signed a resolution sponsored by Supervisor Gerardo Sandoval, and passed unanimously by the Board of Supervisors, urging San Francisco law enforcement not to comply with criminal provisions of any new immigration bill.

“San Francisco stands foursquare in strong opposition to the rhetoric coming out of Washington, D.C.,” Newsom said. “If people think we were defiant on the gay marriage issue, they haven’t seen defiance.”

It is not the first time San Francisco has weighed in on the immigration issue. In 1989, the Board of Supervisors made San Francisco a “City of Refuge.” The ordinance forbids city resources from being used to enforce federal immigration laws or to gather or disseminate information regarding the status of residents of The City. The Board of Supervisors passed a resolution reaffirming the ordinance in January.

The bill at issue is H.R. 4437, a House measure that would make it a crime to be in the United States illegally or offer aid to illegal immigrants. It also would enlist military and law enforcement to help stop illegal immigration, require employers to verify the legal status of workers and build new fences along the U.S.-Mexico border.
Thursday’s press conference came shortly after a group of bipartisan U.S. senators announced they reached a compromise on their version of immigration legislation, which would not criminalize illegal immigration or assisting illeglal immigrants.

Newsom said he was disappointed with Democratic leaders for agreeing to the compromise and that he supported a more immigrant-friendly bill that was put forward by Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass, which was part of the basis of the compromise legislation.

Newsom and other city officials also derided U.S. House of Representatives bill 4437, which calls for building a 700-mile fence along the U.S.-Mexico border and criminalizing groups that provide aid to illegal immigrants.

“National-origin discrimination is the civil rights issue of our time,” said Rodel Rodis, a member of the City College board and an immigration attorney. “I could go to jail because of helping illegal immigrants.”



Wow, thats a funny statement there....and exactly why I hate dumbass liberal POS....
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 10:53:05 AM EDT
Just what chain of events has to occur, presumably early in life, that would make someone do everything in their power to destroy everything that has made their country great?
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 10:53:21 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/7/2006 10:53:42 AM EDT by NewbHunter]

Originally Posted By pzjgr:

Originally Posted By Symtex:
www.examiner.com/Top_News-a70996~Mayor__City_would_ignore_legislation_if_it_were_to_pass.html


Mayor: City would ignore legislation if it were to pass

PDF | Email
Justin Jouvenal, The Examiner
Apr 7, 2006 9:00 AM (5 hrs ago)
SAN FRANCISCO - Mayor Gavin Newsom said Thursday that The City will not comply with any federal legislation that criminalizes efforts to help illegal immigrants.

The mayor also denounced a bipartisan congressional proposal that would beef up border security and allow as many as 12 million illegal immigrants to gain legal status.

Newsom, who has not been afraid to wade into controversial national issues such as gay marriage, appeared with a group of elected officials on the steps of City Hall to support immigrants, “documented as well as undocumented.”Newsom also signed a resolution sponsored by Supervisor Gerardo Sandoval, and passed unanimously by the Board of Supervisors, urging San Francisco law enforcement not to comply with criminal provisions of any new immigration bill.

“San Francisco stands foursquare in strong opposition to the rhetoric coming out of Washington, D.C.,” Newsom said. “If people think we were defiant on the gay marriage issue, they haven’t seen defiance.”

It is not the first time San Francisco has weighed in on the immigration issue. In 1989, the Board of Supervisors made San Francisco a “City of Refuge.” The ordinance forbids city resources from being used to enforce federal immigration laws or to gather or disseminate information regarding the status of residents of The City. The Board of Supervisors passed a resolution reaffirming the ordinance in January.

The bill at issue is H.R. 4437, a House measure that would make it a crime to be in the United States illegally or offer aid to illegal immigrants. It also would enlist military and law enforcement to help stop illegal immigration, require employers to verify the legal status of workers and build new fences along the U.S.-Mexico border.
Thursday’s press conference came shortly after a group of bipartisan U.S. senators announced they reached a compromise on their version of immigration legislation, which would not criminalize illegal immigration or assisting illeglal immigrants.

Newsom said he was disappointed with Democratic leaders for agreeing to the compromise and that he supported a more immigrant-friendly bill that was put forward by Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass, which was part of the basis of the compromise legislation.

Newsom and other city officials also derided U.S. House of Representatives bill 4437, which calls for building a 700-mile fence along the U.S.-Mexico border and criminalizing groups that provide aid to illegal immigrants.

“National-origin discrimination is the civil rights issue of our time,” said Rodel Rodis, a member of the City College board and an immigration attorney. “I could go to jail because of helping illegal immigrants.”



Wow, thats a funny statement there....and exactly why I hate dumbass liberal POS....



People usually do run the risk of going to jail for aiding and abetting criminals.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 10:53:50 AM EDT
Okay, then simply forbid federal resources from being appropriated for anything within the city of SF.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 10:54:42 AM EDT

Originally Posted By NewbHunter:

-snip-

People usually do run the risk of going to jail for aiding and abetting criminals.



Exactly my point, do these dipshits ever listen to what they say?
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 10:55:48 AM EDT
sigh, gavin newsom is a POS, hell half of his police force loathes him.... a few of the guys i know have taken pictures like the hiliary & soldier pics as of late.


i live 40 miles from SF and i hate it... it and berkley as shitholes...
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 10:56:39 AM EDT
So now we have a new PC term.....National Origin discrimination.

If SF was a person, I would give him a swirlie.

Link Posted: 4/7/2006 10:56:56 AM EDT
Newsom was dropped on his head when he was a baby.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 10:57:05 AM EDT

Originally Posted By pzjgr:

Originally Posted By NewbHunter:

-snip-

People usually do run the risk of going to jail for aiding and abetting criminals.



Exactly my point,



Just backing you up bro.


do these dipshits ever listen to what they say?


Nope, they're liberals.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 10:59:48 AM EDT
Well, for me, the bright side is that there is somewhere even more f'ed up than the state I live in!!!
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 11:01:34 AM EDT
Let me guess, they would ignore a new federal ban on weapons too.


Link Posted: 4/7/2006 11:02:40 AM EDT

Originally Posted By SmilingBandit:
Okay, then simply forbid federal resources from being appropriated for anything within the city of SF.



That is exactly what needs to be done.

All these cities with scantuary policies to help illegal immigrants would drop their "principled" stands as soon as the federal teet was held back from them.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 11:02:50 AM EDT
Wait, the whole state of California ignores the 2nd.

I think you'll find that nearly every major city in the US will be effectively doing this sanctuary dance.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 11:07:28 AM EDT
Why am I not surprised?
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 11:09:42 AM EDT
Even more proof liberals hate America.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 11:14:43 AM EDT
I hope they try to leave the union.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 11:20:35 AM EDT



mexico wants it's land back? start with SF. see how long it'll take them to change their stance when their under mexican rule.


Link Posted: 4/7/2006 11:37:21 AM EDT
They need to clear out San Falujah.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 12:38:07 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SmilingBandit:
Okay, then simply forbid federal resources from being appropriated for anything within the city of SF.


+1
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 12:39:58 PM EDT

Originally Posted By sherrick13:
It is time to re conquer SF.



No just use a few MOABs and napalm. It would be a burning parking lot problem solved.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 12:41:44 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Symtex:

Originally Posted By SmilingBandit:
Okay, then simply forbid federal resources from being appropriated for anything within the city of SF.


+1


All the way. Done with the national drinking age. Can EASILY be done with federal law enforcement.

Link Posted: 4/7/2006 12:41:44 PM EDT
Fair enough. If the city can ignore Federal law, then its citizens should be able to ignore local legislation they don't agree with. Dumb turd.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 12:45:31 PM EDT
Can Arizona ship thier illegals to SF?
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 12:45:48 PM EDT

Originally Posted By sherrick13:
It is time to re conquer NUKE SF.



Pending fair warning to fellow ARFcommers, Finish off the PRK for that matter.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 12:50:03 PM EDT
For crying out loud. If South Carolina can't "Nullify" federal law, then I'll be damned if we should let the fruitloops in San Franfreako do it.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 12:54:29 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ghengiskhabb:
Can Arizona ship thier illegals to SF?



Yep, and we can even promote environmental awareness and save fuel...



Use a cannon to ship em.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 12:54:52 PM EDT
Can we start the fence building on the SF city limits?
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 12:57:12 PM EDT
Ship them all to SF and let them deal with them.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 12:58:00 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/7/2006 12:58:41 PM EDT by LVMIKE]
The elite showing how much they think of their positions of power. TThe mayor believes he can have an entire city ignore a federal law, because he (as one man) does not agree with it. Well, thats peachy. I wish that as a lowly serf I could ever aspire to flaunt authority without penalties.

Fucking prick.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 12:59:07 PM EDT

Originally Posted By GySgtD:
Just what chain of events has to occur, presumably early in life, that would make someone do everything in their power to destroy everything that has made their country great?




this is the product of progressive thinking
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 1:02:53 PM EDT

Originally Posted By NewbHunter:

Originally Posted By pzjgr:

Originally Posted By NewbHunter:

-snip-

People usually do run the risk of going to jail for aiding and abetting criminals.



Exactly my point,



Just backing you up bro.


do these dipshits ever listen to what they say?


Nope, they're liberals.




Precisely, it is not for them to listen, it is for YOU to listen and obey.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 1:15:42 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CSeaBass:
sigh, gavin newsom is a POS, hell half of his police force loathes him.... a few of the guys i know have taken pictures like the hiliary & soldier pics as of late.


i live 40 miles from SF and i hate it... it and berkley as shitholes...



i was born and raised in Richmond, stationed at Travis now, currently in sandbox

I F#$%ing HATE san fran
always have, always will.. I wish the whole city would have fallen into a sink hole in 89 instead of just parts of it.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 4:34:57 PM EDT
tag

fucking morons.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 4:38:45 PM EDT
Sensenbrenner bill cuts off all aid to refuge cities. That stops them.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 4:43:52 PM EDT
Quarantine and lay siege.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 4:44:24 PM EDT
I hope he does. Hell, they already actively attract every bum in the US, why not all the illegals too? With the handgun ban they will become the model of "progressive" thinking.

I'm hoping the city turns into a model for the rest of America... on what not to do.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 4:47:41 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/7/2006 4:48:51 PM EDT by Airwolf]
Doesn't surprise me at all.

This fucktard is the one that approved gay marriage in the city despite it being against state law.

The is the fucktard that admitted that the gun ban that was on the ballot (and approved by voters) would be tossed out in court since it's CLEARLY against state law (and they tried it once before and got their asses handed to them) but said "We'll go ahead anyway".

Looks like thinks that going against federal laws will somehow produce different results.

What a tool.

ETA: This is also the same fucktard that said that broadband access is a RIGHT.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 4:48:05 PM EDT
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 4:55:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
I believe that the Governor of a state has the legal right and obligation to remove city officials from office if they willfully ignore laws or requirements of their jobs.

I think the Governator would do it, too.

As Arnold is a (legal) immigrant himself, he probably takes this particular issue very seriously and I'd bet that he hates ILLEGAL immigrants every bit as much as any of us do.

It's clear that most of the country feels like that. I'm glad to see that an effort is being mounted to do something about it, though it's long overdue and I think the final bill as it will pass will not be as strong as I'd like it to be.

CJ



I'll take nothing over an amnesty. Frankly, I'm happy they deadlocked today. The worst possible thing they can do is allow ANY illegals to become citizens without having to go back to their own countries and apply from there and stay there during the application process.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 4:56:12 PM EDT

Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
I believe that the Governor of a state has the legal right and obligation to remove city officials from office if they willfully ignore laws or requirements of their jobs.

I think the Governator would do it, too.

As Arnold is a (legal) immigrant himself, he probably takes this particular issue very seriously and I'd bet that he hates ILLEGAL immigrants every bit as much as any of us do.

It's clear that most of the country feels like that. I'm glad to see that an effort is being mounted to do something about it, though it's long overdue and I think the final bill as it will pass will not be as strong as I'd like it to be.

CJ



He's probably torn. As a legal immigrant offended by the prospect of amnesty yet tempted to be self serving as a politician seeking re-election in a state dominated by hispanics.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 5:14:48 PM EDT
Geez, when I initially looked at the thread title, I thought this was gonna be another thread about mayor ray "How_the_hell_did_he_get_elected" nagin of new orleans but, alas, it's about the yahoos in san fran.I guess I'm just cynical.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 5:22:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Captain_Picard:
Quarantine and lay siege.



no qurantine and make it a sealed off prison like new york from escape from new york...





Link Posted: 4/7/2006 5:41:26 PM EDT
I was in the bay area for some training last week and drove through SF on the way to my brothers. SF used to be a very clean city with some fabulous sights. It now looks and smells like some of the third world cesspools I have been to on occassion. Driving on 19th north of the park there is an all prevading smell of urine. People look everywhere except at you. My brother said he hasn't been out of Marin and over the bridge except to go to the airport in over 5 years. I have never missed having my carry with me more than while making the drive. The infrastructure reflects where the City has its priorities.

A recent Christian Convention was reviled by members of the city council. Intolerant City is an editorial worth reading. It paints a pretty clear picture of the stupidity going on within the city government.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 6:29:23 PM EDT
I can't believe how many guys here say they couldn't care less about Frisco (BTW is that a legal to use here derogatory term?) and then spin into hysteria about a Mayor saying what he might do if certain preliminary legislation passes.

Worry about it if and when it happens and don't visit Baghdad by the Bay. (Like you were going to go anyway?)
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 6:35:02 PM EDT
i've been to a fair number of bigger cities, but san fran is the only city where i saw a couple openly having sex on a public park bench..... at least it was 1 male 1 female and not two guys
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 6:38:16 PM EDT
Well, maybe the federal government should "ignore" all of San Francisco's appeals for federal aid.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 6:49:51 PM EDT

Originally Posted By bullyforyou:
mexico wants it's land back? start with SF. see how long it'll take them to change their stance when their under mexican rule.



You mean they're not already? Coulda fooled me. Didn't I see the mayor of Lost Angeles marching in the Viva la Mexico rally?

I think Arizona needs two fences, one on the Mexico border and one on the Mexifornia border.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 6:53:03 PM EDT
I would be surprised if Gavin Newsom had said that he WOULD enforce the immigration laws.
Link Posted: 4/7/2006 6:54:58 PM EDT


One day, likely in the not too distant future, the "big one" will erase SF from the face of the earth, but in a much bigger way than Katrina did it to NO.

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top