Posted on 04/26/2007 7:59:29 AM PDT by SmithL
SAN FRANCISCO Mayor Gavin Newsom is opposed to federal law enforcement efforts to apprehend illegal immigrants who are violating deportation orders. Ess Eff, the mayor told a gathering at St. Peter's Church Sunday is a "sanctuary city" -- and has been since 1989. So, Newsom assured the audience, "I will not allow any of my department heads or anyone associated with this city to cooperate in any way, shape or form with these raids."
Illegal immigrants, rejoice.
The folks at Immigration and Customs Enforcement are none too happy with the term "raids." Raid implies that agents sweep into homes and businesses trolling for any illegal immigrants upon whom they might happen to stumble, whereas the targets of Operation Return to Sender are "immigration fugitives" named in warrants because they have violated deportation orders or returned here after having been deported.
Often, immigrant fugitives have criminal records. ICE official Virginia Kice told me that of the 1,400 people arrested in Northern California during nine recent months, 785 were immigration fugitives and 339 had criminal convictions in America. "We prioritize those cases involving individuals who are not only immigration violators, but also have criminal convictions, often for serious offenses," said Kice.
In essence, then, Newsom is denouncing immigration officials for enforcing laws passed by democratically elected representatives in Washington. Once again, San Francisco's mayor sends the message that if you don't like a law, then don't work to change it. Just break it. (City taxpayers should take note.)
Why shouldn't ICE officials go after immigration fugitives? Spokesman Nathan Ballard answered, "What the mayor is saying is that these raids instill fear,
...Note the apparent belief that law enforcement personnel should not arrest lawbreakers, lest the arrest upset the offenders' families. That can't help morale at the SFPD.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Just one more reason to raze that f’n city, as if we needed any more. Just wait until Pelosi is back before you do it.
This ahole is just asking all criminals to reside in Frisco. What a dipstick...
still waiting for the list of laws that I, an American citizen, can break because my families feelings might be hurt.
The mental deviates of San Freakcisco have done it again, proving it is the anti-American, lawbreaking anus of California.
” Once again, San Francisco’s mayor sends the message that if you don’t like a law, then don’t work to change it. Just break it.”
This renegade radical liberal mayor (note: Pelosi country) has advocated not only breaking the law (again) but thwarting the will of the people as he has done many times before. Who in the Federal government will hold this outright blatant criminal responsible?? Don’t look to the White House for any support relative to illegal lawbreakers — it is OK to break laws if they involve illegals and their votes.
So San Freakcisco remains an icon to BREAKING THE LAW, like all radical liberals, and watch that this reprobate will not only keep his job (loved by his pinko base) but will not be repromanded and investigated as he should be.
This really should set a precedent that ANYONE IN THIS COUNTRY can break federal laws, and get away with it —
If “the majority” do not believe in his policies, who voted him into power? The Venuzuelans? How about Boxer and Pellosi for that matter?
And if 'Frisco doesn't want them, Oakland does.
Oakland resolutions condemn federal immigration raids
OAKLAND -- Oakland city officials today announced two new resolutions condemning recent federal immigration raids and formalizing the city's intention not to cooperate with the U.S. government effort to deport undocumented residents.
[snip]
How can you say the majority do not agree when he would still get elected today?
The majority did elect him in the first time, I do not believe he will be re-elected.
I was unaware he would be reelected today. Where did you get that info?
“Special City offers sanctuary and safety”
Why is SFO considered a “Special City”?
Some folks in SF call San Francisco the "Special City" when they want to pat themselves on the back for how tolerant and compassionate they are.
Debra Saunders calls it the "Special City" when she is revealing the hypocrisy, intolerance and selfishness of the above group. There is a touch of sarcasm in it when she uses the term.
The Republicans are missing a great chance to “politicize” this.
Using federal highway funding and the 55 mph speed limit as a model. If SF does not enforce federal laws on immigartion (if a state did not enforce a 55mph speed limit)then SF should lose federal funds (the way states were threatened with losing federal highway funds).
Similar to when she refers to "Our betters in Europe".
Doesn’t existing Federal immigration law allow for convicting and seizing the assets of anybody or institution that aids illegal immigration ?
Isn’t any sanctuary city at risk of having City mayors, council members, etc. convicted and City property seized and sold off ?
“Special City offers sanctuary and safety”
Why is SFO considered a “Special City”?
It’s used in the same way as “Special Education.”
RETARDED!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.