I support Special Order 40 [prohibiting police from making migration-related arrests],
What is "special order 40" ? And who can proclaim a special order?
Could the Mayor or head of City Council just proclaim that the local police or county Sherriff can no longer arrest folks for breaking particular laws that are on the books?
THE L.A. CITY COUNCIL IS A BUNCH OF OUTLAWS More on Special Order 40 December 17, 1996 It is a liberal cabal (Goldberg, Wachs, Chick, Braude, Gallanter, etc.) which has promoted the invasion and takover of Los Angeles by Latinos (Alarcon, Alatorre, Hernandez). HERE IS THE TRUTH L.A. City Council to revisit Special Order 40. Special Order 40 was issued on November 27, 1979 by the Los Angeles Police Department under a directive by the Los Angeles City Council. It forbids the LAPD from arresting someone for being in the country illegally AND it forbids the LAPD from COOPERATING with the Immigration and Naturalization Service. This is the wording which pertains to cooperation. "That no officer of the Los Angeles Police Department shall cooperate with the Immigration and Naturalization Service to: inquire into the immigration status of an individual, EXCEPT AND Unless (underlined in the text) required by city, county, state or federal law to inquire into the immigration status of an individual seeking LAPD employment." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is unconstitutional. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- How do we know? On November 19, 1992, California Attorney General Dan Lungren issued a legal opinion. In brief, it said: Question "May a city prohibit its officers and employees from cooperating in their official capacities with Immigration and Naturalization Service investigation, detention, or arrest procedures relating to alleged violations of the civil provisions of the federal immigration laws?" Conclusion "Due to the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution, a city may not prohibit it officers and employees from cooperating in their official capacities with Immigration and Naturalization Service investigation, detention, or arrest procedures relating to alleged violations of the civil provisions of the federal immigration laws -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That was not enough for the L.A. City Council to act. They refused to rescind Special Order 40. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Then in Proposition 187, which was passed by 59% of California voters in November of 1994, it says, in part,: "Every law enforcement agency in California shall fully cooperate with the United States Immigration and Naturalization Services regarding any person who is arrested if he or she is suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That was not enough for the L.A. City Council to act. They refused to rescind Special Order 40. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Then, the Congress of the United States passed HR 2202, the immigration reform bill, which specifically requires cooperation between local law enforcement and the INS. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That was not enough for the L.A. City Council to act. They refused to rescind Special Order 40. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Then, on May 9, 1996, Guy Weddington McCreary, a VCT member, filed a lawsuit against The City of Los Angeles seeking the recision of Special Order 40. The city did not answer the lawsuit and McCreary moved for a DEFAULT JUDGMENT. He expects the court to grant the judgment ANY DAY. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THEY STILL REFUSE TO RESCIND IT.