Sanctuary cities

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I said created not used. Many seem to want to give the impression that in these cities you're immune from deportation which simply isn't true. Some cities are more forgiving than others but they all work with the Feds.

Simple question, why do so many cities employ some sort of sanctuary policy unless it's effective at fighting crime?

Spence, have you ever been objective for 5 consecutive seconds?

You are correct when you say there's a disconnect between federal and local laws. And do you know, in our republic, which law trumps which, in those situations? It's pretty explicit, it's in the supremacy clause. Not a lot of ambiguity.

I have never once heard anyone say that sanctuary cities are set up to fight crime.

In this case, ICE told the authorities in San Francisco to notify them when they let the illegal alien go. ICE would have deported him, for the 7th time. San Francisco, being an enlightened, compassionate place (unlike the rest of the nation) specifically chose to ignore ICE's request, and that decision cost this girl, by all accounts a superb American, her life. And as enlightened as those city leaders are, they sure have been mum on this subject. Not a lot of courage there.

If you think it's good policy to let illegal aliens with multiple felonies, to escape the grip of ICE, you are a liberal. If you think these people should be subject to our duly constituted laws, you are not a liberal. The air on your side of the aisle, is getting pretty funky, Spence.

How the hell did we (and by 'we', I mean liberals) get to the point, where it's controversial to say that guy like this needs to get kicked out, and not let back in? This is not a complicated issue, this should be low-hanging fruit. But nope.