California Sheriff Defies State Sanctuary Law

I see, you use the merry go round argument. it moves but not taking you anywhere.

 

It's not a matter of belief. Its a matter of law. You are incorrect in your interpretation of the law, as I have shown.

 

Ok then good luck with that.

 

Tell us about Jimmy Buffett's secretary again?

 

good luck with what? I don't live in that state. I have no dog in the hung. I'm just correcting the legal ignorance in this thread.

 

Yes and we appreciate the input. Thank you.

 

happy to help

 

And that's irrelevant. The relevant issue is opposing the enforcement of federal law.

WRONG. Both Schaff and Wallace are breaking federal law. Just not the same law. Is any of this starting to sink in?

Along with other sanctuary law whose sole purpose is to thwart the enforcement of federal immigration code.

If (IF) sanctuary cities and states had said, we aren't going to expend our budget and manpower to help you do your job, then that would be one thing. But sanctuary entities...especially the state of California, which is so far out on a limb it is on another tree now, has gone far far beyond that questionable, but defensible, position.
They are actively and purposely working to oppose federal immigration law.

It is because it formalizes a policy that encourages people to break the law. You simply cannot have a state or municipal policy that has as a goal, the thwarting of legally formulated US law! Period.

LOL! That is ESPECIALLY against the law.
Libby Schaff is acting as look out man for dangerous illegal felons and telling them to scatter when ICE shows up. It is insane
to make such a claim. Absolutely insane! Really, really, really absurd!

You are spewing out leftist talking points and it's ridiculous with respect to the actual law.

 

Your neo Marxist overview of the law is interesting (snicker) but ultimately it depends on Cold War moral equivalence fallacy and it seems like all your posts beat on the same old tired drum way too much.

Time to change the music and get a new monkey.

 

Nothing to do with Karl, which you really should read someday if only to learn when invoking his name will display your idiocy and when it will actually apply.

This however is nothing but observable reality, having nothing to do with the Cold War, but your current wars:

America let's its war criminals go free and recycle back into governmental positions and corporate state TV punditry, "the law" has become like everything in america; not actually useful to believe in, but wonderful for bludgeoning opponents with. Like the constitution and the bible.

 

dude; the difference, this time, is States are actually protecting Individual and natural rights.

Only the right wing, never gets it and apply their false analogies to achieve their false causes.

 

We long ago passed laws having bearing on illegals. We only want those laws upheld. If non citizens had rights to be here, they would hold the permits they need to have.

 

There is no "right" to come to this country and decide you will reside here. Nowhere in the world has such a law. No developed country anyway.

 

If you are arguing the merits of the poor being entitled to the earnings of the rich, you are barking at the wrong tree.

My point is despite the Democrats owning their cities, they have vast numbers of the poor who sleep in the streets and get no help from the rich Democrats.

 

Or like your tiresome not-nearly-so-clever-as-you-assume posts.

You really do have merry-go-round repetitious arguments, don't you.

 

We have a Statue of Liberty and travel is a natural right.

 

All foreign nationals in the US should have a federal id. This is a federal problem, not a State problem since 1808.

 

Democrats all over this nation reject the use of a Federal ID.

 

Indeed they do.

Its funny-Obamacare required photo id and only dems voted for it.

But ID to vote? Minorities just can't manage it-and thats their argument.

 

Then go try to get on an airplane or a bus out of the country without a passport and see how that works out for ya.

 

stop businesses and you stop immigration

 

I didn't know travel was a natural right guaranteed in the Constitution. Travel within the nation by citizens is legal and encouraged. In fact, moving from a state which passes laws that you don't like or doesn't have jobs to another which is more conducive to your pursuit of happiness is encouraged.

Become a citizen of the U.S. of A. and you will have those privileges.

 

not everyone wants to become a citizen. anyone in the US who is from a foreign nation, should have a federal id., regardless.

 

You know my grandmother voted republican. Then she past away and started to vote democrat. Think about what the means

 

Please tell me why it's a natural right to travel to any country you want? What kind of federal id? Do you mean so you can vote, collect food stamps and social security? That's too vague for me.

I see nothing wrong with having borders. If we don't, folks moving there can ruin the economy. Each country's government has a right to protect it's citizens from all attacks, foreign and domestic, to a certain extent. Why do foreigners have a right to travel anywhere they want in the world? Is that a god given right? Where does it say that? What god said that? What government says you can travel anywhere you want whenever you want and to any country you want? The U.S. of A. has no laws that say we can't, unless it is for our protection, or unless something else is wrong. I don't know all the laws. Please enlighten me.

If you don't want to become a citizen, what rights of yours do you think should be protected? Why should we allow foreigners to set up lives here and not expect them to become citizens? Why do foreigners want to come here, but not become citizens?