Well, let's see now. Only until just recently the local LEO agencies have for better than two centuries actively enforced our nations federal laws including immigration violations. By using your and the OBL analogy of this then when a LEO comes into contact with an alleged child kidnapper who kidnaps, say an 11 year child (a state criminal statue violation) and crosses the border into another state (another states jurisdiction in which no state law has been committed in the secondary state) and is confronted with the person who broke another states law on kidnapping that the secondary LEO should not apprehend the person and hold them for the other state where the original state law violation occurred and/or the appropriate federal LEO agency since it is only a federal crime in the secondary state for crossing a state line and not a state law violation in the secondary state?
Then they (LEO) get to use as a defense that they can't get involved since it is a federal law violation and not a state law that is being broken in the secondary state? Whew, what logic some people will use to try and justify their positions to open our borders to millions of law breakers.
You know, if this can be carried to its next logical step one could easily argue that then maybe what is needed is only federal LEO agencies and do away with the useless local agencies since they have been renedered impudient. Wasn't that the scenario in H.G. Wells famous book, '1984'.
Only until just recently the local LEO agencies have for better than two centuries actively enforced our nations federal laws including immigration violations. Sir, please reread my post.
I said Federal government had 'no authority to force'...
If the locals CHOOSE to cooperate, it's their affair.
