“Sanctuary City” Opponents Push Back via Petitions

In June 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down large parts of an Arizona state law intended to give local law enforcement the power to enforce federal immigration laws.

The ruling in Arizona v. United States held that three sections of S.B. 1070 were pre-empted by federal immigration law. The Obama administration, which opposed the Arizona law, along with advocates for open borders, hailed the ruling, contending that the U.S. couldn’t very well have 50 different immigration policies.

Many of the same folks who railed against a single state setting its own immigration policy are now vehemently supportive of states — and even towns, cities and counties — thumbing their noses at federal immigration law and providing “sanctuary” to illegal aliens.

These hypocritical sanctuary scofflaws are now facing some long-overdue pushback. Their double standard is showing, and people who favor the rule of law – including legal immigrants – are using online advocacy to push back.

First, the scores of sanctuary cities and jurisdictions, large and small now face the very real threat of being declared ineligible by the Trump administration for at least three different federal Justice Department law-enforcement grants.

The threat of losing those funding streams has given at least some of these sanctuary cities and counties pause to reconsider. The Washington Times reported June 2 that 10 jurisdictions have been told by the Justice Department that they have until the end of June to certify that they’re in compliance with Section 1373 of the U.S. Code relating to illegal immigration. If they don’t meet that deadline, they risk losing eligibility for those grants.

At the same time, average Americans who support U.S. national sovereignty and the rule of law are stepping up and doing their part to make it known that they oppose the cities, counties and states where they live harboring illegal immigrants. Sanctuary status does next to nothing for illegal immigrants who do not commit additional crimes. Sanctuary status only helps those who are here illegally AND arrested on additional criminal charges.

Utilizing online petitioning platforms such as StandUnited.org, Americans are making it known to their elected officials that they object to the defiance of federal immigration laws.

In so doing, they’re helping President Trump fulfill his campaign promise to crackdown on illegal immigration and reassert national sovereignty with respect to who gets to come into the country and who doesn’t.

The first such petition calling for the defunding of sanctuary jurisdictions went online some months ago. At the time, we weren’t sure whether it would resonate, but it has grown steadily since then and now boasts more than 43,000 signatures.

Activists also have taken matters into their own hands with pre-emptive strikes in Traverse City, Mich., and Troy, N.Y. These jurisdictions aren’t sanctuary cities — at least not yet — but they are threatening to start shielding illegal immigrants, so locals there are using petitions to stop those harmful policies before they start. Petitions have also been launched against sanctuary policies in Winston-Salem, N.C., and Richmond, Va.

Contrary to what advocates for open borders might want casual observers to believe, neither the people behind these petitions, nor the folks who sign onto them, are anti-immigrant. What they are against is illegal immigration, and that’s a distinction with a very real difference.

These people oppose illegal immigration because it is dangerous and expensive. Believing in secure national borders, and supporting consequences for breaking the law, is not extremism. It is the foundation of the nation-state system we have enjoyed in the Western world since 1648.

You could ask the parents of Kate Steinle, the 32-year-old San Francisco woman who was fatally shot nearly two years ago on July 1, 2015. The suspect in the case is a five-times-deported illegal alien, Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez. The Steinle case became a rallying cry of President Trump’s campaign promise to build a border wall.

Then there’s the nonpartisan Federation for American Immigration Reform, which in a 2013 report estimated the annual costs of illegal immigration at the federal, state and local level to be about $113 billion — nearly $29 billion at the federal level and $84 billion at the state and local level. Is this per year?

The Winston-Salem petition is all about fiscal concerns. If sanctuary status results in the Trump Justice Department defunding the city, then legal residents — including legal immigrants — will suffer.

The various petitioners and their signatories aren’t suggesting that Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials come to town and raid a community. What they want is, when local law enforcement officials detain an illegal immigrant who has committed an additional crime (beyond being in the country illegally), that they alert federal immigration authorities.

The bottom line is simply this: It shouldn’t be controversial to expect one’s locality to follow federal law.

I am almost 78 years old & a citizen born here in the USA.

IMO—The most pervasive & longest problem this country has faced & is continuing to face is CRIME. Both home grown & imported perps have made this country a target for their law-breaking behavior.

When I grew up-—we didn’t lock the doors at the farm-—we actually did NOT even have keys for the doors. OLD skeleton keys at that-—

We had 6 cars parked in the driveway & the keys were inside & none ever got tampered with.

We ALL rode on the same bus to the high school—no middle school—and there was NOT a series of different buses for the kids who were ‘slower’ or hard to get to behave. ON THOSE SCHOOL BUSSES-——EVERYONE BEHAVED !!! Today- the taxpayers are paying for 3-4 different buses & the taxpayers are paying for it all.

We certainly didn’t have BARS on our windows & doors. While I fully realize that a whole NEW industry came about with the need for such bars on the windows & doors-—I blame the politicians for the fact that those bars are even needed in the first place-— NOT to mention that everyone’s home owner’s policies have skyrocketed because of the breakins & the subsequent musical chairs set up a burglar has to deal with & go right back out onto the street & do it again—and again—and again——

Then the permissive ‘60’s’ came about. Everyone was supposed ‘to do their own thing’. What a load of crap. Too many people of that era squandered their gifts, brains & eventually their productive lives by finding & using drugs of every color & stripe. Decent employees who could provide decent productivity for employers & businesses were useless. Too many politicians turned their backs on such behavior & didn’t work WITH police & Sheriffs to keep these useless people off the streets. More praise & fortune was rained on them instead & the more outrageous their behavior became-—the more famous they became. The Liberals refuse to put to death many criminals who committed heinous crimes & we are paying for hundreds of prisoners who have ‘death sentences’ & are living their lives out incarcerated—given medical attention—etc—at the minimum expense of $100,000 per prisoner. Got a friend or relative who is on a LONG waiting list for a heart transplant? A Prisoner in California got a heart—courtesy of the taxpayers—and someone who never committed a crime in their entire lives did NOT get that heart. Isn’t that SPECIAL??

We have rioters destroying property & businesses & lives who wear masks & call themselves “ANONYMOUS” so they can continue to commit mayhem. During these events—all across the nat9ion & particularly on College campuses-—the author9ities are told to ‘stand down’ & let them rant & rave—burn & loot. Instead of a small spot of Watts Riots—we have this breaking out all over the USA & they don’t get arrested-—and IF they DO get arrested-—they get turned loose without any punishment.

How about that business person who worked hard & went out on a limb to open that business? Many of them are out everything they invested & the insurance companies RIGHTLY refuse to cover their damages-—due to RIOTS which politicians are fomenting on the Liberal side of our politics. Show me one single business owner who deserves such treatment by the rioters. Show me JUST ONE!!!

During the recent years, we had the very bad luck of having to deal with a President & a Congress who wanted more disruption.

Everyone wants jobs & work here in the USA, but I can assure you all that NO area can draw new monetary involvement without putting crime down & doing so with penalties that keep it from coming back next day or week. NO company can draw talented employees from down the block—across the state—or across the country when they will not be safe in that employment & residence.

Penalties HAVE to increase & be applied-—NOT just WRITTEN on the law books & then ignored by the judges.

PAYBACK is coming—& I for one will be happy to see it come.

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.