Pirate's Cove

Texas Governor Greg Abbott designated passing a ban on sanctuary jurisdictions as an emergency priority this year, and the Texas state legislature happily complied, and the bill goes into effect September 1

(Dallas Morning News) Gov. Greg Abbott has signed the state’s sanctuary city ban into law, achieving one of his major goals for the legislative session and enacting a bill that is almost certainly headed for legal challenges from opponents.

“Texans expect us to keep them safe, and that is exactly what we are going to do by me signing this law,” Abbott said before inking his signature during a Facebook Live video Sunday night — the first time a Texas governor has signed a bill through an Internet live stream.

Signing it in that manner drove the Usual Illegal Alien Criminal supporters into apoplexy, because they weren’t able get out into the streets and protest and damage things and poop on things and scream obscenities. Oh, and there’s this

For those wondering why we chose Facebook live. And it's only been an hour. pic.twitter.com/IdkHm7Mf45

— Matt Hirsch (@MattJHirsch) May 8, 2017

Lots of people watched.

Opponents of the law were quick to condemn the signing. Thomas Saenz, president of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, said that the law was a “colossal blunder” and that the lawmakers who championed it were small-hearted.

“MALDEF will do its level best, in court and out, to restore Texas, the state where MALDEF was founded, to its greater glory, and to help Texas to overcome ‘Abbott’s Folly,’ ” he said in a written statement.

So, MALDEF  (imagine what would happen if a group called itself the Caucasion American Legal Defense and Educational Fund) is all in on supporting people who are unlawfully present in the U.S., people who often commit more serious crimes, who deflate wages, and commit identity theft.

Saenz said the law would alienate “nearly half the state population” and make people subject to widespread racial profiling. He said the law undermines voters’ rights to choose elected officials who set local policy, makes the job of local law enforcement more difficult by straining relationships with immigrant communities and would cost Texas in trade and tourism, as well as legal challenges.

“This racist and wrongheaded piece of legislation ignores our values, imperils our communities and sullies our reputation as a free and welcoming state,” Terri Burke, executive director of the ACLU of Texas said in a prepared statement. “We will fight this assault in the courts, at the ballot box, and in the streets if we have to.”

You know they’re out of rational, adult, thought through arguments when they throw out the “racist” word. Because, really, how do you make a coherent and cogent argument to protect people who are breaking federal law, at a minimum, ever single day they are in the U.S.?

Oh, and then there is this

(Breitbart) A recent poll reveals that Texans overwhelmingly support (by 93 percent), a police officer being able to check a person’s immigration status when they are arrested for a crime. Forty-three percent say that immigration status may be checked during a traffic stop, 40 percent say it is okay if the person is reporting a crime, and 39 percent believe that asking about their status is okay if the person is a witness to a crime. Ninety-nine percent of Republicans, and 88 percent of Democrats, think immigration status should be checked during an arrest.

Ninety-three percent of Hispanics believe it is okay to check the immigration status during an arrest, 38 percent think it should be permitted when a person is a crime witness, and 37 percent say it is okay during a routine traffic stop. Interestingly, Latinos are more likely than Anglos to say that immigration status should be checked when a person is reporting a crime (46 percent to 36 percent).

Of course, what the current bill simply does is put sanctuary jurisdictions on the hook to follow the law when it comes to dealing with illegal aliens, as well as things that many like in that poll (back to DMN)

The law will ban cities, counties and universities from prohibiting their local law enforcement officers from asking about immigration status and enforcing immigration law. It will create a criminal charge for police chiefs, county sheriffs and constables who violate the ban and will charge local jurisdictions up to $25,000 for each day they are in violation.

The law will also allow police officers to ask about a person’s immigration status during any legal detention, which could include a routine traffic stop. Opponents have likened the law to Arizona’s “papers, please” legislation, parts of which were struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court.

It’s rather sad that a law had to be enacted to get certain law enforcement members to comply with federal law.

Crossed at Right Wing News.