Following this post on Sanctuary city mayors I am posting the LAW related to this situation. It seems to me that there is plenty of LAW on the books to arrest – charge – prosecute and convict each and every one of these ANTI-AMERICAN politicians and bureaucrats.
WGEN message board https://www.voy.com/19385/
We know who it is that the Democrats, RINO’S, and their ilk serve – now, WHO is it that YOU serve? WHO do YOU worship and obey?
Published November 17, 2016
Sanctuary cities dig in for fight with Trump administration
Democratic mayors in so-called “sanctuary cities” are poised for a major clash with President-elect Donald Trump as city officials from Los Angeles to Washington vow not to cooperate with his administration on deportation orders for illegal immigrants.
Trump’s election has spurred mayors and police chiefs in nearly a dozen major cities to re-affirm their “sanctuary” status, putting them in direct conflict with Trump’s immigration enforcement push — and effectively daring him to slash sanctuary-city funding as he promised during the campaign.
“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,” Mayor Rahm Emanuel said during a press conference. “Chicago will always be a sanctuary city.”
Emanuel joined officials in New York; Seattle; Boston; San Francisco; Los Angeles; Oakland, Calif.; Providence, R.I.; Santa Fe, N.M.; Denver; and Washington, D.C., in saying they will maintain their sanctuary status.
Emanuel also shrugged off Trump’s call to cut funding.
“I would say to the president-elect, that the idea that you’re going to penalize Boston, New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, Philadelphia — these are the economic, cultural and intellectual energy of this country,” Emanuel said in a radio interview.
New York Mayor Bill de Blasio said last week he would go so far as to destroy a database of undocumented immigrants with city identification cards before handing it over to the Trump administration.
“We are not going to sacrifice a half-million people who live amongst us,” de Blasio said. “We will do everything we know how to do to resist that.”
In sanctuary cities, local law enforcement officials aren’t required to contact U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement about the immigration status of people they come in contact with. That can mean, for example, that they don’t notify the feds when an undocumented immigrant is about to be released from custody.
Sanctuary cities can also bar their employees, including police, from asking about a person’s immigration status because crime victims and witnesses might be less likely to talk to investigators if they are worried about being deported.
Trump said in a recent “60 Minutes” interview that he plans to deport 2 million to 3 million undocumented immigrants who have a criminal history. He’s also said he could create a special deportation task force within ICE, though sanctuary city resistance could complicate their efforts.
“Sanctuary” policies surged back into the national spotlight last year after the shooting death of Kathryn Steinle by an undocumented immigrant in San Francisco. The shooter had been released from a county jail even though federal officials had asked him to be held until they could take custody.
Critics of sanctuary cities argue the policies harbor criminals and endanger public welfare.
“President-elect Trump is talking about a very focused effort to get rid of people who are criminals,” former House Speaker Newt Gingrich told Fox News’ “The O’Reilly Factor.” “You’d think that the mayor of Chicago, in the middle of the worst murder pattern in the city’s history, would be thrilled to have somebody help him get rid of criminals.”
But Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck calls Trump’s plan to deport illegal immigrants misguided and impractical.
“I need them to work with their local police stations, I need them to be witnesses to violent crime,” Beck said. “For a local law enforcement agency to take on [the] role of immigration enforcement tears that fabric apart.”
Because states and cities can’t be required to enforce federal law and there’s no U.S. requirement that police ask about a person’s immigration status one of the only options Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress have is to pull funding.
During a September campaign stop in Phoenix, Trump said, “Cities that refuse to cooperate with federal authorities will not receive taxpayer dollars” and pledged his administration would “work with Congress to pass legislation to protect those jurisdictions that do assist federal authorities.”
Trump’s ability to cut off federal funding rests primarily with Congress. In the past, congressional Republicans have tried — and failed — to use federal funds as leverage.
Last year, Democrats in the Senate blocked a bill by Republican Sen. David Vitter that would have stripped some federal funding from cities that shield undocumented workers from federal immigration officials.
Vitter, who is retiring from the Senate, tweeted Tuesday: “#Sanctuary Cities are illegal, dangerous. Obvious 1st step: Withhold fed funding for cities ignoring immigration law.”
Big GOP wins in the House and Senate on Election Day have some like Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, optimistic there is momentum for change.
“This is one of [Trump’s] marquee campaign promises and it’s got strong Republican support,” Stein said. “It’s very likely we’ll see legislative action early on.”
Rep. Vern Buchanan, R-Fla. is pushing for Congress to quickly pass two bills tied to sanctuary cities — Kate’s Law, which would toughen penalties against anyone who re-enters the country after being deported, and the Stop Dangerous Sanctuary Cities Act, which would cut federal funding to any city that refuses to enforce immigration laws.
“Taxpayers should not be supporting cities that ignore federal law,” Buchanan said in a written statement. “While we are a nation of immigrants, we are also a nation of laws. Our No. 1 priority should be targeting criminals that are here illegally.”
Despite the show of support from some GOP lawmakers, it’s still unclear what money Trump might actually pull from the cities.
The Supreme Court has held that for Congress to impose conditions on the receipt of federal money by the states, the conditions must be reasonably related to the purpose of the money. For example, the feds threatened to withhold highway funds from any state that failed to adopt a 0.08 blood-alcohol limit: Both the limit and the highway funding were related to road safety.
Still, the Justice Department’s inspector general looked at some jurisdictions with sanctuary policies earlier this year and concluded some appear to violate a federal law that says state and local governments may not prohibit or restrict officials from sharing information about a person’s immigration status with federal immigration officials. Having such policies could jeopardize millions of dollars in DOJ grant money the jurisdictions receive, the IG memo said.
Fox News’ Barnini Chakraborty, Jonathan Hunt and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only. GRG [Ref.
Source: Cornell Law School U.S. Code Collection
US CODE: TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER II > Part VIII
§ 1324. Bringing in and harboring certain aliens
(a) Criminal penalties (1) (A) Any person who (i) knowing that a person is an alien, brings to or attempts to bring to the United States in any manner whatsoever such person at a place other than a designated port of entry or place other than as designated by the Commissioner,
regardless of whether such alien has received prior official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States and regardless of any future official action which may be taken with respect to such alien; (ii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, transports, or moves or attempts to transport or move such alien within the United States by means of transportation or otherwise, in furtherance of such violation of law; (iii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors,
or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation; (iv) encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law; or (v) (I) engages in any conspiracy to commit any of the preceding acts, or (II) aids or abets the commission of any of the preceding acts, shall be punished as provided in subparagraph (B).
(B) A person who violates subparagraph (A) shall, for each alien in respect to whom such a violation occurs (i) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i) or (v)(I) or in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(ii), (iii), or (iv) in which the offense was done for the purpose of commercial advantage or private financial gain, be fined under title 18, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both; (ii) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(ii), (iii), (iv), or (v)(II), be fined under title 18, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both; (iii) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i), (ii), (iii), (iv), or (v) during and in relation to which the person causes serious bodily injury (as
defined in section 1365 of title 18) to, or places in jeopardy the life of, any person, be fined under title 18, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both; and (iv) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i), (ii), (iii), (iv), or (v) resulting in the death of any person, be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined under title 18, or both. (2) Any person who, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has not received prior official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, brings to or attempts to bring to the United States in any manner whatsoever, such alien, regardless of any official action which may later be taken with respect to such alien shall, for each alien in respect to whom a violation of this paragraph occurs (A) be fined in accordance with title 18 or imprisoned not more than one year,
or both; or (B) in the case of (i) an offense committed with the intent or with reason to believe that the alien unlawfully brought into the United States will commit an offense against the United States or any State punishable by imprisonment for more than 1 year, (ii) an offense done for the purpose of commercial advantage or private financial gain, or (iii) an offense in which the alien is not upon arrival immediately brought and presented to an appropriate immigration officer at a designated port of entry, be fined under title 18 and shall be imprisoned, in the case of a first or second violation of subparagraph (B)(iii), not more than 10 years, in the case of a first or second violation of subparagraph (B)(i) or (B)(ii), not less than 3 nor more than 10 years, and for any other violation, not less than 5 nor more than 15 years.
(3) (A) Any person who, during any 12-month period, knowingly hires for employment at least 10 individuals with actual knowledge that the individuals are aliens described in subparagraph (B) shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both.
(B) An alien described in this subparagraph is an alien who (i) is an unauthorized alien (as defined in section 1324a (h)(3) of this title),
and (ii) has been brought into the United States in violation of this subsection. (b) Seizure and forfeiture (1) In general Any conveyance, including any vessel, vehicle, or aircraft, that has been or is being used in the commission of a violation of subsection (a) of this section,
the gross proceeds of such violation, and any property traceable to such conveyance or proceeds, shall be seized and subject to forfeiture.
(2) Applicable procedures Seizures and forfeitures under this subsection shall be governed by the provisions of chapter 46 of title 18 relating to civil forfeitures, including section 981(d) of such title, except that such duties as are imposed upon the Secretary of the Treasury under the customs laws described in that section shall
be performed by such officers, agents, and other persons as may be designated for that purpose by the Attorney General.
(3) Prima facie evidence in determinations of violations In determining whether a violation of subsection (a) of this section has occurred, any of the following shall be prima facie evidence that an alien involved in the alleged violation had not received prior official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States or that such alien had come to, entered, or remained in the United States in violation of law:
(A) Records of any judicial or administrative proceeding in which that alien’s status was an issue and in which it was determined that the alien had not received prior official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States or that such alien had come to, entered, or remained in the United States in violation of law.
(B) Official records of the Service or of the Department of State showing that the alien had not received prior official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States or that such alien had come to, entered, or remained in the United States in violation of law.
(C) Testimony, by an immigration officer having personal knowledge of the facts concerning that alien’s status, that the alien had not received prior official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States or that such alien had come to, entered, or remained in the United States in violation of law.
(c) Authority to arrest
No officer or person shall have authority to make any arrests for a violation of any provision of this section except officers and employees of the Service designated by the Attorney General, either individually or as a member of a class, and all other officers whose duty it is to enforce criminal laws.
(d) Admissibility of videotaped witness testimony Notwithstanding any provision of the Federal Rules of Evidence, the videotaped (or otherwise audiovisually preserved) deposition of a witness to a violation of subsection (a) of this section who has been deported or otherwise expelled from the United States, or is otherwise unable to testify, may be admitted into evidence in an action brought for that violation if the witness was available for cross examination and the deposition otherwise complies with the Federal Rules of Evidence.