This is making Open Borders, illegal alien criminal Democrats livid (via Hot Air)
US immigration agents find ways around ‘sanctuary’ policies
Two years after New Mexico’s largest county barred local law enforcement from cooperating with immigration authorities, its leaders learned that the policy was being subverted from within.
Staff members at the Bernalillo County jail in Albuquerque were still granting immigration authorities access to its database and, in some cases, tipping them off when a person of interest was being released.
“I was surprised and horrified,†said Maggie Hart Stebbins, chairwoman of the Bernalillo County Commission. “Individual employees do not have the freedom to pick and choose what they want to observe.â€
The disclosure last month cast a spotlight on an often-overlooked way in which immigration officials around the U.S. may be getting around local “sanctuary†policies — through informal relationships with police and others willing to cooperate when they’re not supposed to. Immigration activists say they have seen it places like Philadelphia, Chicago and several communities in California, which has a statewide sanctuary law.
On Wednesday, for example, the American Civil Liberties Union reported that emails show that a detective in Orange County, California, regularly looked up license plate information for an immigration officer.
“Often people underestimate the informal relationship between ICE and local law enforcement,†said Sara Cullinane, director of the immigrant-rights organization Make the Road New Jersey. She said a major way to make sure immigrant-friendly ordinances are being obeyed is training officers about what they can and cannot do.
It’s rather disturbing that anyone would find it “horrifying” that law enforcement would work together to deal with criminals who are also illegally present in the U.S. Further, it should be horrifying that elected officials are refusing to follow federal law.
Regardless, it is great that law enforcement is finding ways to get around the despicable sanctuary policies in a variety of ways.
Unfortunately, they aren’t able to find ways around all sanctuary policies nor get cooperation
(Breitbart) Two California counties failed to honor ICE detainers for a Salvadoran national before the murder of a woman for which he has now been arrested.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had issued nine detainers for criminal illegal alien Carlos Eduardo Arevalo Carranza, 24, in order to deport him, but Los Angeles and Santa Clara counties each ignored them. Carranza has a “long criminal history,†according to NBC Bay Area. The counties released him every time without notifying ICE.
Carranza was recently arrested for the vicious murder of a 59-year-old woman in San Jose in February.
His more than ten prior convictions over three years include “kidnapping, drug possession, battery on a police officer, trespassing and burglary†according to the report that added he was diagnosed with psychosis in 2016.
It’s long past time for the Federal Department Of Justice to start filing charges, holding jurisdictions, certain law enforcement, and elected officials responsible for the policies that let illegal aliens go who then go on to commit other felonies.
U.S. is violating human rights, lying about how asylum seekers are treated at border, per new report
https://thinkprogress.org/amnesty-international-report-dhs-lying-asylum-seekers-09a94d5f2df5/
Under orders by the Trump administration, thousands of asylum seekers fleeing dangerous living situations are being arbitrarily detained, forced to return to their country of origin, and separated from their children. According to a scathing new report from Amnesty International, these actions by the U.S. government violate human rights.
The U.S. is prohibited from sending asylum seekers back to countries or territories where their lives or freedom would be threatened, either directly or indirectly, yet that is exactly the policy of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
Seeking asylum is not a crime, yet the Trump administration continues to treat those who arrive at ports of entry in search of a better life as if they were criminals.
For the report, Amnesty International interviewed dozens of asylum seekers and immigration officials and concluded that the administration deliberately adopted this policy in order to deter immigration to the U.S.
Over the summer, both Attorney General Jeff Sessions and DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen repeatedly insisted that asylum seekers who entered through designated ports of entry at the border would not be arrested.
“We do have a policy of prosecuting adults who flout our laws to come here illegally instead of waiting their turn, claiming asylum at ports of entry. They can go to our ports of entry if they want to claim asylum and they won’t be arrested,†Sessions said in June. “We cannot and will not encourage people to bring their children or other children to the country unlawfully by giving them immunity in the process.â€
Sec. Kirstjen Nielsen
@SecNielsen
“This misreporting by Members, press & advocacy groups must stop. It is irresponsible and unproductive. As I have said many times before, if you are seeking asylum for your family, there is no reason to break the law and illegally cross between ports of entry.”
This report directly contradicts those statements. In fact, the report found that DHS implemented a de-facto policy of turning away of asylum-seekers along the entire U.S.-Mexico border, including at designated ports of entry, a policy that Nielsen herself admitted exists. She labeled it the “metering†of asylum claims.
“We are ‘metering’, which means that if we don’t have the resources to let them [asylum-seekers] in on a particular day, they are going to have to come back. They will have to wait their turn and we will process them as we can, but that’s the way that the law works. Once they come into the United States, we process them. We have asked Congress to fix this loophole. It’s a huge gaping loophole that we need to fix because it is so abused.”
Turning away asylum seekers, even if they’re told to come back later, violates a basic principal of international human rights law: the prohibition of “refoulment,†forcing people to return to a place where they might be at risk of serious human rights violations.
Some asylum seekers travel hundreds or even thousands of miles to reach a port of entry, and have nowhere to go if turned away at the border, forcing them to sleep in line for days or weeks.
According to the report, in late December 2017, Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) turned away dozens of asylum seekers at the San Ysidro port of entry. When 24 asylum seekers decided to sleep in line at a plaza on the Mexico side of the border, Mexican municipal police cleared the area and arrested the remaining asylum seekers.
In addition to being turned away at ports of entry, some asylum seekers were also separated from their children. Amnesty International interviewed 15 individuals who were separated from their children by DHS officials, both before and after the Trump administration’s “zero-tolerance†policy went into effect.
While the administration hasn’t yet publicly disclosed how many families were separated as a result of the policy, CBP provided data to Amnesty International in September that detailed approximately 8,000 “family units†were separated — a number far greater than the 3,000 previously estimated.
That the Trump administration would lie about its treatment of asylum seekers isn’t too surprising, considering the entire family separation crisis revolved around one huge lie told by Sec. Nielsen — that the U.S. did not have a policy of separating families at the border.
A recently disclosed memo signed by Nielsen in April 2018 proves there was.
“DHS could also permissibly direct the separation of parents or legal guardians and minors held in immigration detention so that the parent or legal guardian can be prosecuted,†the memo said.
When one cites Think Progress</> then all credibility is shot and reading any further is a complete waste of time.
ThinkProgress, home of Matt Yglesias?
Right there you’ve shot yourself in the head.
Turning away asylum seekers, even if they’re told to come back later, violates a basic principal of international human rights law:
We have a Constitution. That is the principle we follow. Come out of the cave some time. You might learn something.
That the Trump administration would lie about its treatment of asylum seekers isn’t too surprising, considering the entire family separation crisis revolved around one huge lie told by Sec. Nielsen — that the U.S. did not have a policy of separating families at the border.
No, it doesn’t. Zippy had one, mostly to stop child traffickers from exploiting kids alone, but all the Lefties, who care more about optics than actually helping people, made Trump shut it down.
No need to respond to anyone who finds anything credible from Think Progress.
I read some of Maggie Hart’s twitter feed. It’s horrifying that she’s in charge of anything. The feminization of leadership is strong with that one. Corporations and guns are evil and drug users just need more money so they stop stealing.
ICE could just set up mobile enforcement outside of courthouses and police stations.
It’s horrifying that law enforcement would ignore an ordinance that orders them to ignore federal law?
Wow what a hypocritical idiot.
Nighthawk: It’s horrifying that law enforcement would ignore an ordinance that orders them to ignore federal law?
Under the U.S. Constitution, the federal government can’t commandeer state or local governments to enforce federal law. While state and local governments can choose to cooperate with the federal government, they are under no legal obligation to do so. However, if a state or local government passes a law that requires or prevents their officers from cooperating with the federal government, then that is an enforceable legal restriction.
Right and wrong, Zach.
Cato Institute:
Can a state impede federal authorities from enforcing their own law if the state deems the law to be unconstitutional. The answer is “No,†although more radical nullification proponents would disagree. They point to the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798 and 1799, in which Thomas Jefferson and James Madison asserted a state’s right to nullify the Alien and Sedition Acts.
But consider those resolutions in context: Jefferson and Madison had argued that the states must have the final word because the Constitution had not expressly established an ultimate authority on constitutional matters.
Four years later in Marbury v. Madison, Chief Justice John Marshall resolved that oversight. He wrote: “It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.†Since then, instead of 50 individual states effecting their own views regarding constitutionality, we have one Supreme Court establishing a uniform rule for the entire nation.
Sanctuary policies for illegal aliens are getting innocent Americans killed.
Period.
Bob: Can a state impede federal authorities from enforcing their own law if the state deems the law to be unconstitutional. The answer is “No,â€
That’s right. While the federal government can’t commandeer state and local governments, neither can state and local governments impede the federal government enforcing federal law.
But the latter wasn’t the point addressed, which concerned commandeering, as seen in the original post and in some following comments.
William Teach: It’s long past time for the Federal Department Of Justice to start filing charges, holding jurisdictions, certain law enforcement, and elected officials responsible for the policies that let illegal aliens go who then go on to commit other felonies.
No. What you’re asking is that the federal government should punish state and local official for not submitting to being commandeered to enforce immigration law. That is not a power the federal government has.
No. What he’s saying is if state and local officials aid illegal aliens avoid federal authorities and they then commit crimes then those officials should be held accountable both criminally and civilly. Elected officials who deliberately cause harm to American citizens should be punished by law. Severely. And removed from office for malfeasance.
Kye: What he’s saying is if state and local officials aid illegal aliens avoid federal authorities …
To “let illegal aliens go” from customdy is not providing aid under the law. The state is under no obligation to inform federal officials.