TexasCHLforum.com

Color me surprised only by the rapid public announcements, not by the fact that these mayors will--or at least think they can--take this stance.

First out of the blocks is our old friend Rahm Emanuel, corrupt mayor of one of the most corrupt cities in America. Oh, and by the way, one of the most violent cities in America...where we might mistakenly believe federal assistance to remove illegal immigrant who are also violent criminal actors would be welcomed as a way to help protect the citizens of the third largest city in the country. But, noooo.... Emanuel held a press conference today saying that "Chicago always will be a sanctuary city," and, in part:

To all those who are, after Tuesday's election, very nervous and filled with anxiety as we've spoken to, you are safe in Chicago, you are secure in Chicago and you are supported in Chicago.... We are a welcoming city [for immigrants], not just in the language and the rhetoric I use, but it's clear in the ordinance I passed, and we will stay a welcoming city."

The ordinance Emanuel is referring to is one he rammed through city council in 2012. In brief, the law says that Chicago police could turn over to federal immigration agents information on immigrants in the country only if they are wanted on a criminal warrant or have been convicted of a serious crime. The law prohibits police from providing ICE officials access to people who are in the PD's custody unless officers are "acting pursuant to a legitimate law enforcement purpose that is unrelated to the enforcement of a civil immigration law." It also prohibits officers from allowing ICE agents to use their facilities for interviews or investigation. And it bars on-duty officers from responding to ICE inquiries or talking to ICE officials about a person's custody status or release date, and forbids city workers of any type from disclosing the citizenship or immigration status of people "except as otherwise provided under applicable federal law."

Emanuel went even further this year by getting an ordinance passed to provide issuance of municipal ID cards to undocumented immigrants.

Other city mayors who have joined this public bandwagon:

• New York
• Los Angeles
• San Francisco
• Minneapolis
• Seattle
• Philadelphia

An incomplete list of related links:

• http://remezcla.com/lists/culture/sanct ... -of-trump/
• http://kstp.com/news/mayor-betsy-hodges ... s/4316555/
• http://www.politico.com/states/illinois ... ies-107313
• http://fortune.com/2016/11/11/new-york- ... ald-trump/
• http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-new ... ayor-says/
• http://www.sfexaminer.com/mayor-lee-sf- ... residency/

What are the penalties for openly refusing to enforce federal law or cooperate with federal law enforcement?

Wouldn't that be harboring a fugitive from justice, or something along those lines?

I realize there are possible futures that involve the federal government enacting laws that I would want the local law enforcement to refuse to comply with. I'm just curious.

So does this mean that if I somehow manage to get elected mayor of Katy, I can just instruct my police force to ignore any federal laws that I dislike, and I can also make it illegal for my police force to cooperate with any federal agencies?

My education must be really out of date. I somehow was mistakenly taught that U.S. cities were NOT independent nations that could just disregard any federal laws they dislike.

By the same logic, I'm assuming that Rahm is OK with a local HOA saying that residents can own unregistered guns in their neighborhoods within Chicago, right?

Don't get me wrong, I agree with the general idea of moving all law making authority back to the local level. As long as we are consistent.

Add Austin to this list.

Mayor Adler jumped on this band wagon.

DNC convention had illegal as one of their speakers. Does this surprise you? If you add a ton of voters (or their kids who are now automatically citizens) to the democratic party (which is where they will go) you win elections. That's why Terry McAuliffe wants to restore voting right to felons. This is just a simple math problem, you get a ton of voters that all will vote democratic and you win elections. The tendency to have a higher reproduction rate is even better if you are a democrat looking for votes. I think that Israel has the same problem with the increasing size of the Arab population (and they can vote).
I don't say these things in any disrespect to any groups, only as a factual statement that Blacks and Hispanics tend to vote democratic and they have a higher birth rate than whites. If there are 11,000,000 illegals in the country now that is about equal to the total number of people that voted in the last election. Their kids (probably all citizens) will eventually vote.

rotor wrote:DNC convention had illegal as one of their speakers. Does this surprise you? If you add a ton of voters (or their kids who are now automatically citizens) to the democratic party (which is where they will go) you win elections. That's why Terry McAuliffe wants to restore voting right to felons. This is just a simple math problem, you get a ton of voters that all will vote democratic and you win elections. The tendency to have a higher reproduction rate is even better if you are a democrat looking for votes. I think that Israel has the same problem with the increasing size of the Arab population (and they can vote).
I don't say these things in any disrespect to any groups, only as a factual statement that Blacks and Hispanics tend to vote democratic and they have a higher birth rate than whites. If there are 11,000,000 illegals in the country now that is about equal to the total number of people that voted in the last election. Their kids (probably all citizens) will eventually vote.

You're absolutely right. This election wouldn't have been as close as it was were it not for illegal voters. I hope to see the requirements for voting tightened up before the next election. I don't know if it will be, but it is sorely needed to protect the validity of our electoral system.

Any city or State that openly welcomes "folks" who commited felony by smashing into our house should be cutoff. Common sense.

Are there any DUI sanctuary cities? How about convicted rapists sanctuary cities?..

Republican President, Republican House, Republican Senate..... should make distribution of certain federal funds related to law enforcement contingent on actually enforcing the law....

parabelum wrote:Any city or State that openly welcomes "folks" who commited felony by smashing into our house should be cutoff. Common sense.

Are there any DUI sanctuary cities? How about convicted rapists sanctuary cities?..

Technically a misdemeanor or civil violation, but I understand the sentiment. Is Dallas a sanctuary city? I wasn't sure.

ScottDLS wrote:

parabelum wrote:Any city or State that openly welcomes "folks" who commited felony by smashing into our house should be cutoff. Common sense.

Are there any DUI sanctuary cities? How about convicted rapists sanctuary cities?..

Technically a misdemeanor or civil violation, but I understand the sentiment. Is Dallas a sanctuary city? I wasn't sure.

You are correct. Illegal entry is a misdemeanor, re-entry is a felony.

I am not sure about Dallas being a sanctuary city. Wouldn't surprise me.

Hypothetically, could a judge make "move to Chicago and don't come back" a condition of a deferred adjudication agreement?