Posted on 02/01/2017 1:17:44 PM PST by SeekAndFind
This may be one of those good news, bad news stories. The good news is that Donald Trump may not have to worry about sanctuary cities in California any more. The bad news is that the left coast denizens may just turn the whole darn thing into a sanctuary state. At least that’s the latest word coming from their state legislature. (Associated Press)
Democrats in the California Senate ramped up their fight Tuesday against President Donald Trump, advancing bills that would create a statewide sanctuary for people in the country illegally, provide money to pay lawyers for immigrants facing deportation and hamper any attempt to create a Muslim registry.
The moves in the nation’s largest state — home to an estimated 2.3 million immigrants without legal authorization — came days after Trump launched his crackdown on immigration and sanctuary cities across the nation.
The city of San Francisco sued Trump on Tuesday, claiming his executive order that would cut funding from sanctuary cities is unconstitutional and a “severe invasion of San Francisco’s sovereignty.”
That last comment regarding the City by the Bay highlights where a lot of this unrest is coming from. The Mayor of San Francisco has been making the rounds of local radio, talking about a plan which seems to have been hatched by Eric Holder (in his new capacity as the Golden State’s chief warrior against Trump) and it’s gaining traction in liberal circles. We had a bit of foreshadowing of this strategy last week, as reported in the New York Times.
An hour after the president signed the order, a group of California state senators said they planned to fight it in court, with help from Eric H. Holder Jr., former attorney general, whom the Legislature has retained to take on what the senators said they expected would be continued fights with the Trump administration. They said Mr. Trump’s order violated the 10th Amendment by forcing local governments to enforce federal statutes.
There’s some real irony in Holder’s approach because the Tenth Amendment is one which is generally either forgotten or despised by liberals in most cases. States’ rights is an issue which is almost exclusively near and dear to the hearts of conservatives. But now that Trump is talking about bringing the hammer down on cities which defy the laws of the land it’s suddenly becoming critical to the health of the democracy. Go figure.
Also, this is a fairly broad interpretation of the amendment to put it mildly. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution charges Congress with the responsibility to “establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.” Much of the details are left to the Executive branch as to how that’s enforced. At no point does the Constitution mention giving the states the right to overrule the federal government on immigration law. Similarly, the states have a lot of control over which state and local laws to pass and/or enforce, but they do not have the ability to simply break federal immigration law.
I’d love to see this one battled out in court and get a modern era ruling putting the question to bed. In the meantime, California stands to lose a massive amount of federal funding if they choose to go down this path, unless of course they can successfully challenge that in court as well. The SCOTUS has, in fact, ruled in the past that Washington can’t simply remove unrelated funding arbitrarily as punishment, but there’s plenty of law enforcement funding which would probably be on the table. It’s going to be a long and interesting ride from here on out.
A sanctuary State is easier to deal with.
Not all that wild. I had exactly the same thought.
"Bad idea, I know."
Why??? Kick'em out of the USA and let'em petition to become part of Mexico.
There is no “proper” way. If the people of California vote to secede then they get to go their own way. No Constitutional Amendment needed as the US Constitution is silent on the issue. Any other shenanigans by the other 49 states will not be tolerated, nor should it be.
Not a bad idea at all. Cut their water. Cut their electricity. No more military bases for them. We’d still have access to the west coast through Washington, Oregon and Alaska. Ban CA produce and encourage people to grow victory gardens to help offset the difference.
The next earthquake - opps, sorry, they’re on their own. They’d have to make their own currency, electrical grid, military, water, CaliforniaCare, raise taxes to pay for all their illegals, etc. If they want back into the Union, we take them back in 5 separate states so they can’t control elections.
Sounds like a win for the US.
Death to Aztlan!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aztl%C3%A1n
Death to Reconquista!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconquista_(Mexico)
Maybe finally the rest of the country are going to wake up to what American Patriots in California been telling you for 40 years!... these Pricks are an invading our country! Quit worrying about Muslims worry about Mexico’s the descended of the Muslim Invaders of Spain! The same damn blood
Just get a federal warrant to search their jails every week for illegals and remove them.
I first set foot in California 45 years ago.. I have lived here for close to 35 years and seen true Climate Change.. changing from a state with unlimited opportunities and jobs for the taking, from schools that actually taught about history and didn’t push agendas.. to one run by unions, malcontent socialites, and the media who fail to report most of what goes down corruption-wise lest they fall prey to a legislature that can’t stop itself.. and doesn’t even try anymore to pretend who it represents.
The school systems get half the tax revenue yet can never adequately prepare their ‘victims uhh students for what faces them outside of the liberal womb.
It’s hard to say where the original seeds of rot came from, most were from the Northeast as they brought loads of liberal attitude and policy with them when they discovered the Golden State.
“I’d love to see this one battled out in court and get a modern era ruling putting the question to bed”
So would I!!, Personally I do not think this is too big of a deal, AG Sessions just needs to send the FBI to ARREST AND JAIL the Entire Legislature,Governor, Aides ,Lawyers,... Even Secretaries for this FELONY CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY. We can be the First State to have our entire Government put in PRISON at the Same time. Then bring in an Army/Marine General to run things until we have a New Election.
Federal Immigration and Nationality Act
Section 8 USC 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv)(b)(iii)
“Any person who . . . encourages or induces an alien to . . . reside . . . knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such . . . residence is . . . in violation of law, shall be punished as provided . . . for each alien in respect to whom such a violation occurs . . . fined under title 18 . . . imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.”
Section 274 felonies under the federal Immigration and Nationality Act, INA 274A(a)(1)(A):
A person (including a group of persons, business, organization, or local government) commits a federal felony when she or he:
• assists an alien s/he should reasonably know is illegally in the U.S. or who lacks employment authorization, by transporting, sheltering, or assisting him or her to obtain employment, or
• encourages that alien to remain in the U.S. by referring him or her to an employer or by acting as employer or agent for an employer in any way, or
•knowingly assists illegal aliens due to personal convictions.
Penalties upon conviction include criminal fines, imprisonment, and forfeiture of vehicles and real property used to commit the crime. Anyone employing or contracting with an illegal alien without verifying his or her work authorization status is guilty of a misdemeanor. Aliens and employers violating immigration laws are subject to arrest, detention, and seizure of their vehicles or property. In addition, individuals or entities who engage in racketeering enterprises that commit (or conspire to commit) immigration-related felonies are subject to private civil suits for treble damages and injunctive relief.
Recruitment and Employment of Illegal Aliens
It is unlawful to hire an alien, to recruit an alien, or to refer an alien for a fee, knowing the alien is unauthorized to work in the United States. It is equally unlawful to continue to employ an alien knowing that the alien is unauthorized to work. Employers may give preference in recruitment and hiring to a U.S. citizen over an alien with work authorization only where the U.S. citizen is equally or better qualified. It is unlawful to hire an individual for employment in the United States without complying with employment eligibility verification requirements. Requirements include examination of identity documents and completion of Form I-9 for every employee hired. Employers must retain all I-9s, and, with three days’ advance notice, the forms must be made available for inspection. Employment includes any service or labor performed for any type of remuneration within the United States, with the exception of sporadic domestic service by an individual in a private home. Day laborers or other casual workers engaged in any compensated activity (with the above exception) are employees for purposes of immigration law. An employer includes an agent or anyone acting directly or indirectly in the interest of the employer. For purposes of verfication of authorization to work, employer also means an independent contractor, or a contractor other than the person using the alien labor. The use of temporary or short-term contracts cannot be used to circumvent the employment authorization verification requirements. If employment is to be for less than the usual three days allowed for completing the I-9 Form requirement, the form must be completed immediately at the time of hire.
An employer has constructive knowledge that an employee is an illegal unauthorized worker if a reasonable person would infer it from the facts. Constructive knowledge constituting a violation of federal law has been found where (1) the I-9 employment eligibility form has not been properly completed, including supporting documentation, (2) the employer has learned from other individuals, media reports, or any source of information available to the employer that the alien is unauthorized to work, or (3) the employer acts with reckless disregard for the legal consequences of permitting a third party to provide or introduce an illegal alien into the employer’s work force. Knowledge cannot be inferred solely on the basis of an individual’s accent or foreign appearance.
Actual specific knowledge is not required. For example, a newspaper article stating that ballrooms depend on an illegal alien work force of dance hostesses was held by the courts to be a reasonable ground for suspicion that unlawful conduct had occurred.
IT IS ILLEGAL FOR NONPROFIT OR RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS to knowingly assist an employer to violate employment sanctions, REGARDLESS OF CLAIMS THAT THEIR CONVICTIONS REQUIRE THEM TO ASSIST ALIENS. Harboring or aiding illegal aliens is not protected by the First Amendment. It is a felony to establish a commercial enterprise for the purpose of evading any provision of federal immigration law. Violators may be fined or imprisoned for up to five years.
Encouraging and Harboring Illegal Aliens
It is a violation of law for any person to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection in any place, including any building or means of transportation, any alien who is in the United States in violation of law. HARBORING MEANS ANY CONDUCT THAT TENDS TO SUBSTANTIALLY FACILITATE AN ALIEN TO REMAIN IN THE U.S. ILLEGALLY. The sheltering need not be clandestine, and harboring covers aliens arrested outdoors, as well as in a building. This provision includes harboring an alien who entered the U.S. legally but has since lost his legal status.
An employer can be convicted of the felony of harboring illegal aliens who are his employees if he takes actions in reckless disregard of their illegal status, such as ordering them to obtain false documents, altering records, obstructing INS inspections, or taking other actions that facilitate the alien’s illegal employment. Any person who within any 12-month period hires ten or more individuals with actual knowledge that they are illegal aliens or unauthorized workers is guilty of felony harboring. It is also a felony to encourage or induce an alien to come to or reside in the U.S. knowing or recklessly disregarding the fact that the alien’s entry or residence is in violation of the law. This crime applies to any person, rather than just employers of illegal aliens. Courts have ruled that “encouraging” includes counseling illegal aliens to continue working in the U.S. or assisting them to complete applications with false statements or obvious errors. The fact that the alien is a refugee fleeing persecution is not a defense to this felony, since U.S. law and the UN Protocol on Refugees both require that a refugee must report to immigration authorities without delay upon entry to the U.S.
The penalty for felony harboring is a fine and imprisonment for up to five years. The penalty for felony alien smuggling is a fine and up to ten years’ imprisonment. Where the crime causes serious bodily injury or places the life of any person in jeopardy, the penalty is a fine and up to twenty years’ imprisonment. If the criminal smuggling or harboring results in the death of any person, the penalty can include life imprisonment. Convictions for aiding, abetting, or conspiracy to commit alien smuggling or harboring, carry the same penalties. Courts can impose consecutive prison sentences for each alien smuggled or harbored. A court may order a convicted smuggler to pay restitution if the alien smuggled qualifies as a victim under the Victim and Witness Protection Act. Conspiracy to commit crimes of sheltering, harboring, or employing illegal aliens is a separate federal offense punishable by a fine of up to $10,000 or five years’ imprisonment.
Enforcement
A person or entity having knowledge of a violation or potential violation of employer sanctions provisions may submit a signed written complaint to the INS office with jurisdiction over the business or residence of the potential violator, whether an employer, employee, or agent. The complaint must include the names and addresses of both the complainant and the violator, and detailed factual allegations, including date, time, and place of the potential violation, and the specific conduct alleged to be a violation of employer sanctions. By regulation, the INS will only investigate third-party complaints that have a reasonable probability of validity. Designated INS officers and employees, and all other officers whose duty it is to enforce criminal laws, may make an arrest for violation of smuggling or harboring illegal aliens.
State and local law enforcement officials have the general power to investigate and arrest violators of federal immigration statutes without prior INS knowledge or approval, as long as they are authorized to do so by state law. There is no extant federal limitation on this authority. The 1996 immigration control legislation passed by Congress was intended to encourage states and local agencies to participate in the process of enforcing federal immigration laws. Immigration officers and local law enforcement officers may detain an individual for a brief warrantless interrogation where circumstances create a reasonable suspicion that the individual is illegally present in the U.S. Specific facts constituting a reasonable suspicion include evasive, nervous, or erratic behavior; dress or speech indicating foreign citizenship; and presence in an area known to contain a concentration of illegal aliens. Hispanic appearance alone is not sufficient. Immigration officers and police must have a valid warrant or valid employer’s consent to enter workplaces or residences. Any vehicle used to transport or harbor illegal aliens, or used as a substantial part of an activity that encourages illegal aliens to come to or reside in the U.S. may be seized by an immigration officer and is subject to forfeiture. The forfeiture power covers any conveyances used within the U.S.
RICO — Citizen Recourse
Private persons and entities may initiate civil suits to obtain injunctions and treble damages against enterprises that conspire to or actually violate federal alien smuggling, harboring, or document fraud statutes, under the Racketeer-Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO). The pattern of racketeering activity is defined as commission of two or more of the listed crimes. A RICO enterprise can be any individual legal entity, or a group of individuals who are not a legal entity but are associated in fact, AND CAN INCLUDE NONPROFIT ASSOCIATIONS.
Tax Crimes
Employers who aid or abet the preparation of false tax returns by failing to pay income or Social Security taxes for illegal alien employees, or who knowingly make payments using false names or Social Security numbers, are subject to IRS criminal and civil sanctions. U.S. nationals who have suffered intentional discrimination because of citizenship or national origin by an employer with more than three employees may file a complaint within 180 days of the discriminatory act with the Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices, U.S. Department of Justice. In additon to the federal statutes summarized, state laws and local ordinances controlling fair labor practices, workers compensation, zoning, safe housing and rental property, nuisance, licensing, street vending, and solicitations by contractors may also apply to activities that involve illegal aliens.
Thank you for your grasp of the Constitutional issues involved.
There are so many considerations for anything this catastrophic.
Would Californians lose their ability to freely move within the other States of the Union? What about property owners who don’t want secession - they own the land. And commerce between States. Who would own the highways? My mind is in chaos!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If Moonbeam gets his way it will start a civil war in California and the criminal Democrats will find out if the Federal law can just be pitched out.
We won’t have to worry about Calexit. If California wants to secede, CA can be occupied, all its “rulers” deposed, tried and imprisoned and then put CA under military control for 10 years (no voting in federal election and appointed state leaders) as happened after the Civil War.
Don’t worry, the metrosexuals in CA won’t fight like Johnny Reb.
10 U.S. Code § 332 - Use of militia and armed forces to enforce Federal authority
Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion.
There must be someone in the FR world that knows if a state can be turned back into a territory. We could let them cede, conquer them, make it a territory, appoint a territorial governor and the democrats lose 55 electoral votes. But it would be nicer if there was a legislative way to do it.
I agree, California cannot secede no matter how hard they stomp their feet. But what California libs are forcing, is a revival of the push to split CA into 7 proposed states. Leaving LA and SF having to negotiate with other states for things such as water rights. Which would warm the cockles of my heart.
LOL! NOW liberals find comfort in the 10th Amendment.
Easy. Cut off ALL fed funds of any sort. If they haven’t seen the light, cut off electrify and water. The state is run by seditious LIB lunatics.
Statewide no-fly list for non-compliance of issuing authority for state I.D.-—lack of vetting.
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.