Posted on 01/03/2024 10:11:14 AM PST by DallasBiff
Chicago suburbs pass their own ordinances
Lawmakers in Chicago suburbs in recent days have approved new laws similar to the busing ordinance in the nation’s third-most-populous city that aims to streamline migrant drop-offs and stop buses from leaving new arrivals “in the middle of traffic, on random street corners and at O’Hare International Airport,” Chicago officials have said.
Texas has sent over 28,000 asylum-seekers to Chicago since August 2022, according to Friday numbers from Abbott’s office.
“This was a tough one, because we don’t want to look like we don’t care, but we have to move forward and get a handle on all of this,” Councilperson Jan Quillman of Joliet said of the ordinance in her city that passed unanimously.
Snip In Hinsdale, the penalty for violating the ordinance is a $750 fine for each passenger, and buses could be seized and impounded. The community of Wilmington, south of Chicago, passed a similar ordinance Tuesday, said its mayor, Ben Dietz
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
No! No! The Interstate Commerce Clause rules all! (Activist judges claimed in the 40’s 50’s and 60’s). This can’t stand. Suburbs interfering directly with interstate transportation.
The Chicongans are a bunch of Marthas. They don’t want these sanctuary-seeking, home flag waving bass turds either.
“Oh my a $750 fine,”
$750 each illegal.
Good luck getting $750 from the passengers, or even from the bus driver. Heck, I am not even sure if the ordinance is Constitutional.
Anyway, there is Amtrak to Chicago, and Metra (commuter rail) stops all over. If need be, drop them off in Beloit, WI, and they can walk into Illinois. They have shown themselves to be good at walking.
Illegal as those “No blacks after sunset” signs in the 1950s.
Which, ostensibly, drags it under the interstate commerce clause.
Money changes hands, it’s commerce.
An item of value (bus) is impounded, taking it out of commerce.
Texans don’t get to vote on Biden’s importation of tens of thousands of illegals coming in.
Why should these Rat cities get a vote?
Sounds like Jan Quillmen of Joliet wants to make sure it doesn’t look like they don’t care. Wow! Isn’t that special. She cares she just doesn’t want to pay taxes to support the illegals.
LOLOL...damned Democrat hypocrite. You DON'T CARE no matter how much you don't want to look like you don't care. Be honest for once in your miserable lives.
Isn't that quite like "effective border control" or even "building a border wall"?
As in, the open borders policy is not supposed to harm us Dems.
This is illegal and a violation of their civil rights. The migrants were granted entry by the US government. That comes with no geographic restrictions.
NO local government has the right to say which legal residents of the USA may or may not come to their city.
This is illegal as hell and a violation of civil rights under color of law... a FELONY. We will still be well within the statute of limitations when Trump takes office.
The new DOJ should be making arrests of these mayors and cops.
It’s no different than the Jim Crow in the south.
I hope Trump announces that these cops and mayors will be prosecuted.
History repeating itself. After the Civil War, the Northern states passed exclusionary laws to keep blacks from relocating to their areas....Hypocrites always. After those laws were repealed the migration began and I’m sure many Yankees had regrets.
Sounds like Jan Quillmen of Joliet wants to make sure it doesn’t look like they don’t care. Wow! Isn’t that special. She cares she just doesn’t want to pay taxes to support the illegals.
Sounds like Abbott needs to sign this same ordinance for the entire State of Texas. Start fining the hell out of every illegal that illegally enters Texas. Crap, I might be on to something here.
Which, ostensibly, drags it under the interstate commerce clause.
Every migrant chooses the destination he wants and signs a release form. Texas even tells them the temperature that day where they want to go. If they agree they are loaded into buses for their free ride.
This is criminal behavior on the part of these cities.
Now Texas will start flying them in to random airports. I wanna see these cities take on the FAA and start saying what flights can and cannot land.
I don't think these passengers have $750.00
Unless of course they were one of the lucky ones who got $5,000 for free.
Notice most of the links are "Fact Check" denials. Proof enough that this is true.
So the STATES have the authority to protect freedom of movement! Doees it work the opposite way, too? Do the STATES have the authority to restrict freedom of movement?
Freedom of movement under United States law is governed primarily by the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the United States Constitution which states, "The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States." Since the circuit court ruling in Corfield v. Coryell, 6 Fed. Cas. 546 (1823), freedom of movement has been judicially recognized as a fundamental Constitutional right. In Paul v. Virginia, 75 U.S. 168 (1869), the court defined freedom of movement as "right of free ingress into other States, and egress from them."However, the Supreme Court did not invest the federal government with the authority to protect freedom of movement. Under the "privileges and immunities" clause, this authority was given to the states, a position the court held consistently through the years in cases such as Ward v. Maryland, 79 U.S. 418 (1871), the Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. 36 (1873) and United States v. Harris, 106 U.S. 629 (1883).
More rules/laws for those who’ve already entered the county ILLEGALLY!?!?!?
They can’t. Anyone legally in the US can travel anywhere except a restricted govt base. And without needing approval from any city, county or state. That is ironclad law.
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.