Replies

I still don’t understand your objection to Thompson’s proposal. Clearly there is a breakdown between the federal law as currently written, and the local enforcement of that law.

Thompson is proposing pushing enforcement of existing law - along with additional stiffer penalties for sanctuary cities to ensure that the law is enforced locally. As of now, the penalties are clearly not stiff enough, as federal law isn’t being enforced.

His proposal to allow the withholding of federal funds for intentional lack of enforcement would close the loophole that is currently allowing federal law to be ignored ... and act as a means of forcing sanctuary cities to enforce the law.

According to results, the current law is clearly ineffective ... thus changes in penalties are required.

I don’t see the problem here.

I still don’t understand your objection to Thompson’s proposal. Clearly there is a breakdown between the federal law as currently written, and the local enforcement of that law.

There is no breakdown with respect to the way the law is written. The only breakdown is the refusal to enforce the law. Thompson doesn't need to create a grand plan to impose existing laws. He would only need to exercise his authority as President to require the Justice Department to apply immigration laws to the letter. Any announcement involving more than simply stating he would exercise his authority as President is grandstanding.

Thompson is proposing pushing enforcement of existing law - along with additional stiffer penalties for sanctuary cities to ensure that the law is enforced locally.

He doesn't need to propose stiffer penalties. The Federal Immigration and Nationality Act goes beyond penalties(fines). It also includes imprisonment and confiscation of real property. No plan needs to be formulated. The only statement he needs to make is that as President he would order the Justice Department to strictly enforce this law.

His proposal to allow the withholding of federal funds for intentional lack of enforcement would close the loophole that is currently allowing federal law to be ignored ... and act as a means of forcing sanctuary cities to enforce the law.

This proposal is needless. The law I have cited is strong enough to discourage municipalities from declaring their communites as a sanctuary cities if the law is enforced.

According to results, the current law is clearly ineffective ... thus changes in penalties are required.

Any law is ineffective if it isn't enforced! Passing more laws will only ensure those laws aren't enforced. a law is only effective if people have the will to apply the law as it is written. Such a strategy is redundant and therefore pointless.