Obviously it’s a states rights argument. Of course, that’s completely ignoring the will of the people in those states in favor of the states’ politicians selling them out for votes. In other words, the complete reversal of the actual intent of the tenth amendment. The will of the ruling class over the will of the ruled.
To FOLLOW the constitution…
If an illegal immigrant is pulled over for a busted taillight and brought into custody… can law enforcement hold them longer than 3 days? Can law enforcement hold an illegal immigrant, indefinitely, if they didn’t commit a crime?
Looks like you answered your own question. They are here illegally and subject to deportation, so yes…they can be held until their stank ass is deported.
do you realize when one enters the country Illegally, they are called wait for it… “illegals”
Tell me you knew this?
when you enter the United states Unlawfully you are breaking the law
Tell me you knew this?
Whether they hold them for 3 minutes or longer than 3 days is irrelevant, they are here “Illegally”
they broke the law, so whether they have a busted tail light or not, I’m going to assume they don’t have a valid driver’s license , insurance or maybe even valid tags.
You do know that is also breaking the law driving without a valid license , tags or insurance
Tell me you knew this?
You’re a funny uninformed little boy or girl or what ever.
How long can you hold someone for a misdemeanor? Should cities be able to hold someone for a misdemeanor indefinitely?
You could just answer the question… but I know why you won’t.
the Immigration folks can only work as fast as they can, they are not robots where they can work round the clock only stopping for a tune up break.
Deportations takes time, and if some of them are held for a while, so be it, sucks to be them attempting to enter the country illegally
next time use the front door like everyone else
Answering anything for you is an insult to everyone on this site as your nothing but a shill and leftist void of fact and could care less how many Americans illegals kill.
You are referring to laws that we already know need to be changed. The constitution does not allow illegal aliens to come and take our money, rape and kill our little girls and women, steal medical resources and plant their progeny upon our country through a misinterpretation and misapplication of a constitutional amendment. We already know that the laws that permit these things are only misinterpretations of the constitution. And they need to be changed.
Introduced: June 13, 2017
Status: Signed into law on June 27, 2018
Delaware’s law allows family members and law enforcement to file for lethal violence protection orders if they can present clear and convincing evidence that a person is at risk for shooting themselves or others. LVPOs also authorize law enforcement to search for and seize firearms if the filer can accurately describe the firearms and possible locations. This law follows the April signing of the Beau Biden Gun Violence Prevention Act, which allows police officers to remove firearms from an individual only after a mental health professional has deemed the person a danger to themselves or others. (As The Trace has reported, mental illness, by itself, is not a predictor of violent behavior.)
Bill: CS/SB 7026
Introduced: February 21, 2018
Status: Signed into law on March 9, 2018
Florida’s red flag provision came bundled in the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Act, which passed with the support of67 NRA A-rated legislators. In the weeks following the bill’s passage, Florida judgeshaveissuednumerousrisk-protection orders,including one against Zachary Cruz, the brother of the Parkland gunman.
Introduced: January 26, 2017
Status: Signed into law on July 16, 2018
The proposal passedboth state chambers with veto-proof majorities with one day remaining in the session. The bill sat on Republican Governor Bruce Rauner’s desk for over six weeks before being signed into law.
Introduced: February 9, 2018
Status: Signed into law on April 9, 2018
The passage of Maryland’s red flag bill came down to the wire. After debating amendments proposed by the Senate, the House of Delegates sent the final legislation to Governor Larry Hogan’s desk with less than two hours remaining in the Legislature’s 2018 session. “I firmly believe that the bill will save lives, and I’m pleased that there was a general consensus on the bill and the legislative process to get it through,” Delegate Geraldine Valentino-Smith, the bill’s chief sponsor, told The Trace in April.
Introduced: first version on January 23, 2017
Status: Signed into law on July 3, 2018
Republican Governor Charlie Baker was moved to support the bill after endorsement from the state’s police chiefs. The Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association expressed itssupportfor the proposal near the end of April. The association president, Chief Steven Wojnar, told theState House News Servicethat the measure could be a valuable tool for family and law officers to protect people in crisis, as well as those around them. Existing state law allows police officers to revoke the permits that Massachusetts requires for gun ownership, but makes no provision for confiscating guns in a disqualified person’s possession.
Introduced: January 1, 2018
Status: Signed into law on June 13, 2018
The bill passed the both chambers in early June with bipartisan support, and was signed by Democratic Governor Philip Murphy within a week. Murphy also signed A1181, a separate measure that requires law enforcement to confiscate a person’s guns if a mental health professional has determined the person may harm themselves or others.
New York’s red flag bill sailed through the Democrat-held state legislature in late January with a collection of other gun-related measures. It was signedinto law within a month by Governor Andrew Cuomo. Last session, a similar red flag provision stalled in state Senate, which was at the time controlled by Republicans. The package of bills passed by New York lawmakers is considered the most significantset of gun laws to clear the state’s legislature since 2013, in the wake of the Sandy Hook school shooting.
Introduced: February 23, 2018
Status: Signed into law on June 1, 2018
Governor Gina Raimondo signaled her support for risk-protection legislation with an executive order, prior to the bill passing the state’s General Assembly. The Rhode Island chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union has described the bill as “well-intentioned,” butopposesit for its broad scope and “lenient standards for both applying for and granting” protective orders.
Introduced: March 30, 2018
Status: Signed into law on April 11, 2018
Then you should advocate for changing the laws… not shitting on cities who don’t unlawfully detain illegals.
I do want the laws to change but its a slow process, and I am shitting on sanctuary cities because they don’t realize they exacerbate the problem
I care about all murders… stop putting words in my mouth and just ask next time.
We do spend an inordinate amount of time talking about illegals and crime (illegals commit crime at a lower rate)… and not talking about domestic terroism and crime.
But I digress… I think there are changes that can be made to our immigration system but I don’t think we should be motivated to change because of the potential crimes very few commit. I think we should do something to allow for a safe and speedy transition from immigrants to US citizen
Sanctuary cities are acting lawfully… are out suggesting that they should act unlawfully? Is this why Joe Arpaio was so popular with the right?
Preventing the federal government from exercising its ability to deport people is anything but lawful.
nice cherry picking Pragmatic, you want to throw in Micheal Brown and Freddie Gray too?
Sanctuary cities are a bad idea, look, the bottom line is we either support immigration control or we have open borders
The fact that are coming here illegally to escape their homeland is not our problem, we have our problems here that we need to address, there are homeless vets, remember them?
There domestic criminals who wreaks havoc on our society, we have drug cartels flooding our streets with drugs, we have homelessness problems, look at San Fran
We have gang shootings in inner cities , so why dont we focus on our homegrown problems instead of allowing every Jose, Pina and maria who wants a better life in America and expects us to assimilate to them vs the other way around
If jose, jesus, Pina and Maria want to come to America the legal way and they end up as American citizens and contributes we welcome them with open arms.
Long enough to make a phone call to ICE.
How can anyone even begin to respond to this comment.
that wasn’t the point, they shouldn’t be here to commit the crimes in the first place, if they want to commit crimes ,do so in their country as we could care less.
We have our own domestic criminals to deal with