California has always had a distant relationship with Washington and Mexico when they tried stick governors who knew nothing about the state here. If the country wants to keep dividing itself from us, they will see new alliances which don’t include Washington
1
Stomp on the sanctuary movement and end it once and for all. The only way to have a functioning immigration system is to enforce it and prosecute those who would thwart enforcing it. This is no different than any other law.
The role of the Executive branch of government is to enforce the law. If an entire state, like California, has become a rogue, scofflaw, state, it is not only appropriate, but obligatory, for the Executive branch to "go to war" to stop the illegality -- cold.
23
As an immigrant, albeit a legal one, it is painful to see immigrants, even illegal, whose lives are upended by deportation or the threat of it.
On the other hand, it’s shocking to see how American citizens condone or demand selective enforcement of US laws. Something is either legal or illegal; “undocumented” is an euphemism meant to say “I don’t like this law, I don’t recognize its implications, because of my ideological beliefs”.
People on the left should realize that if the law would be optional, causes dear to their heart, like the right to abortion, would also suffer, because there are plenty of people who say this runs counter to their beliefs.
13
ICE has the right to arrest, detain, and deport undocumented people. I just don't want my local tax dollars( State, County, City) going to that. ICE is a FEDERAL agency. Republicans should raise taxes if there isn't enough revenue to get the job done.
8
States that have not made laws protecting their residents from federal roundups for deportation or any other reason they come up with as California's Gov. Jerry Brown and State Attorney General Bacerra have, then they should jump on it and enact similar laws ASAP. Otherwise, who will be left to help those states when this fascist administration comes for them. I am so very proud to live in California. A state that has elected a humanitarian, four times, to be our governor. Thank you, California voters and thank you, Governor Jerry Brown.
6
So states' rights are sacred until you don't agree with that state?
If you want to carry your guns around, one state's laws override another's, but if you want to protect your people from federal overreach, you're suddenly obstructionist. Oh the hypocrisy.
8
I recall Nixon, only too well, and Reagan's eagerness to 'have a war' with opponents of his regime.
But there's never been anything like this. The country, the world, will take years to recover from the damage being done daily. We have a clear path to salvation: remove every Republican in November. We can, and must, do this for future generations.
8
'“I’m worried about the ‘Dreamers,’ hard-working [illegal] immigrant families and law-abiding people who are just trying to make their way like the rest of us,”'
The speaker left out the word in brackets, "illegal". They are not "hard working immigrants", rather illegal aliens. Moreover, there are Dreamers who are living in this country legally, and they shouild be our priority. For example, an earlier NYT piece implied that 50 students per year at the prestigious public university UC Berkeley (200 total) are illegal aliens. These illegal aliens are taking spots from people who are living here legally.
Illegal aliens take enormous sums of taxpayer money for education and healthcare. There is a great housing shortage in California, illegal aliens have worsened that shortage.
It is profoundly unfair to people living in this country legally, those who are citizens or those who went through the immigration process legally to have tax money and university spots given to illegal aliens.
Immigration is a *federal issue not a state issue.* and states should not be interfering with the federal government trying to do it its job.
So many people scream how they hate Trump but it is their actions which assuredly will get him reelected.
31
If you're voting out of spite, you're doing it wrong.
3
I hope you do not claim to be a Christian! Most Dreamers DO pay taxes, so do their undocumented parents! They come to the U.S. because our agricultural system NEEDS workers and they are hired. If not, our crops would rot on the vines, fields and trees!
Perhaps undocumented workers need to revolt and refuse to harvest our crops! See how this works out for the economy!
7
8 USC 1324 (1) (A) (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
17
Memo to the Mayor of Sacramento"
You do not have to worry about hard-working immigrant families and law-abiding people. ICE should have no issues with them. Now, if you meant that you are worried about hard-working ILLEGAL immigrants and ILLEGAL immigrants who are otherwise law-abiding people then you have a problem with not trying to hide what the real issue is. ICE's job is to arrest and deport ALL ILLEGALS. Not to distinguish between the ones who are hard-working and the ones who are not.
28
Then expect our Nation's crops to rot! Without undocumented workers our agricultural system would FAIL!
3
Every time I hear someone say this, I am reminded of how Southern cotton farmers once said exactly the same thing about their slaves.
13
The Tenth Amendment (Amendment X) to the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights,The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Jeff Session....HANDS OFF California!
7
Nice try. The Federal Government has exclusive authority to regulate immigration and naturalization and has exercised that power by congressional action on several occasions.
24
"Gov. Jerry Brown was named in a lawsuit that seeks to block three California laws that may hinder the federal immigration agenda."
Didn't you mean to say "laws that my hinder the enforcement of federal immigration law.?
21
"The illegal immigration problem..."
... is all in your mind. Here in southern California, we understand that the problem isn't the immigrants - documented or not - the problem is the illegality and the wasteful bureaucracy associated with it.
The immigrants work harder than anybody. Our economy is thriving and they are a significant part of that success.
And the children of immigrants? They're just like the rest of us. Our grand/parents came from somewhere else, looking for a chance to make a life, to give something better to their children.
When you attack us...
When you sue us...
You only make us stronger.
You remind us, once again, of the need for all of us, here, to stand together, to support one another, and to resist your vile, racist actions.
Goodbye, pathetic, racist, little men. Your time is over.
Do you hear that sound?
It's getting louder and louder.
That's all of us, laughing at you.
We Will Resist.
We Will Win.
17
If California is in such a good shape, then why are people moving to places such as Las Vegas Nevada, etc. because the housing market is so high?
13
You are aware that LA is awash in poverty because it is home to so many very poorly educated, low earning illegal "immigrants"? Do you not know that 60% of California's non elderly Medicaid/Medi-Cal enrollees are Hispanic? What part of California are you living in that is so removed from it being an amalgam of the First World and the Third World?
13
Republicans believe strongly in State's Rights......... except when they don't.
13
Nothing beats starting your day being lectured on civics by the likes of Arkansas, South Carolina and Alabama.who can't get their school systems, work force or civil systems out of the mess they're in.
California, it seems to me, is doing fine.
Envy, not righteousness, is the driver here. Destroy what you don't have instead of working out how to get it.
This latest stunt plays into the very worst, most grudging, most bitterly envious and destructive forces in human nature, like so much else in this pathetic administration.
Hey, Jeff, if you are worried about people taking responsibility for getting people killed, how about you give CA a miss and focus on the NRA?
I promise we won't miss you.
13
Some numbers I’d like to see. How many illegals living in California are on public assistance, and how many dollars are sent via Western Union to Mexico from California. Do the math. It’s tax dollars going to Mexico.
21
Majority of people on "public assistance" are American citizens, majority are WHITE, most are military families! DO some research before you judge everyone!
6
Mari, I hear what you’re saying. Still, 20 percent of the state’s population lives below the poverty level. Illegal immigration plays a role in the fact that one-third of the nation’s welfare recipients lives in California and that one of four California state residents was not born in the United States—or that one-half of all immigrant households receives some sort of government assistance. There’s no way a measurable portion of those assistance dollars don’t leave the country.
7
... well, I might be wrong but I think
that if international economic policies were anywhere near fair,
people from Mexico - or any other "poorer country" on this earth -
would not even have to migrate in pursuit of a decent living.
Around the globe,
migrants' money transfers keep entire countries from collapsing.
2
California is on the same course as the Confederate States of America. The federal government control immigration laws, not the states.
This will go to the Supreme Court, and California will lose.
25
I’ve seen many comments comparing the issues of slavery to this issue. I believe that there is, indeed, a parallel – but it is not about State Rights. It is about Civil Rights. The Civil War was fought because a group of people (slaves) had no rights. The US Government (the North) won, and slaves got freedom (and later, the right to vote). The immigrants who are the subject of this law suit, aspire to the same civil rights as to which the slaves aspired. This time the US Government (Trump/Sessions) is trying to deny them any measure of civil rights. Long live California!
8
Odd. I remember a couple years ago when the state of Arizona wanted to enforce immigration law, the Obama Admin fought tooth and nail saying immigration issues are solely within the purview of the federal government. Can't have it both ways folks.
21
The AZ "law" never passed, do some research AND it was unconstitutional.
3
The Trump Strategy is brilliant. He's trying to cause a Calexit. Without California's 55 electoral votes, he would have won the Electoral College 307 to 172--and gained the popular vote as well.
In fact, without California, no Democrat would have won the White House in the past 50 years.
11
First, let's make this clear: California (and Democrats) don't want to protect dangerous immigrants who have committed crimes.
What's happening In many states is that ICE agents are rounding up people who aren't a threat to society and deporting them- tearing families apart and creating an environment of terror for the immigrant population. This is causing people in these vulnerable groups to be reluctant to report dangerous criminal activity and may even endanger some of their lives. (ICE is actually making everyone less safe by these actions.)
8
First of all, MOST immigrants are NOT committing rimes! Do some research!
1
if they obeyed the law to start with this wouldn't be a problem
11
King Donald rewards his friends and punishes his enemies. Words we call 'laws' are useful only as justification for what king Donald wants to do; otherwise they are ignored. There has been a lot of this attitude on the Republican side of the fence for many years, but Donald has taken it to a level previously unimagined - or untried, at least. He uses the power of the justice system selectively, to enforce his rule.
Donald's partisans are loyal (or perhaps frightened of him) to a fault; there's no reasoning with a fanatic. King Donald can do no wrong, or if he does it's not his fault. Rules are meant for other people - or Democrats - to follow. Trump-populism is just another word for 'scofflaw' - 'wrong' means 'getting caught'.
The ballot box got us into this mess and it will have to get us out…that and Robert Mueller.
7
Look up US Code Title 18, Part I, Chapter 1, code 3 -- Accessory after the fact, a 2 sentence law, the first of which states, "Whoever, knowing that an offense against the United States has been committed, receives, relieves, comforts OR ASSISTS THE OFFENDER IN ORDER TO HINDER OR PREVENT HIS APPREHENSION, TRIAL OR PUNISHMENT, IS AN ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT. The second sentence cites the penalties for violating this federal statute. The fact that Trump, Sessions, et al don't even mention this federal statute tells me they're completely ignorant of the law, or they know of the law and deliberately refuse to talk about it publicly because they just want to meaninglessly bluff "sanctuary city/state" officials, which would placate their base by appearing to do something about this situation, while not upsetting Democrats by actually doing something meaningful to stop this violation of US Code Title 18, Part I Chapter 1 Code 3 -- accessory after the fact. People like Trump may not have been a politician before winning political office. But it sure doesn't take them long in certain ways to act like every other career politician that ever came down the Pike. Both parties are like NFL football teams. They play the same game by the same rules -- with the Democrats focusing mostly on offense over time, and the Republicans focusing (poorly) on defense.
4
Democrats should explain to Americans why one particular group was first given a reprieve from following the law under Obama and is now being given total immunity from it by California?
They could start by explaining their behavior to everyone sitting in local, state and federal prisons. I'm sure inmates who are serving time and their families suffering tremendous hardship would be very interested in how democrats determined certain offenders should not only not be prosecuted but also protected from law enforcement.
Why not make CA a sanctuary city for low level drug offenders? Isn't their plight significant given their harsh treatment? Of course, there would be no poking Trump in the eye. Extreme left democrats are now willing to openly flaunt laws just to get back at Trump.
This is what the left has wrought. I hope democrats pay dearly for it.
13
If I hear "But U.S. born people don't want those horrible jobs" one more time!!!!
Thinly veiled Liberal Classism at it's finest (and I'm liberal - I just like working with my hands). I've cleaned offices. picked fruit. washed dishes, mowed lawns, thrown garbage, and now work construction. I've seen all of these fieds inundated with cheaper labor through illegal immigration. All of these fields not 25 years ago used to provide decent jobs for people in school or otherwise who were citizens.
(I'm a white, educated, middle class guy here),
Such an Ivory tower viewpoint of the world while trying to seem caring. Class bias toward hard work, written all over these comments demeaning work that I once did, (and still do) with pride as "nobody want's it", Such classism. "Super Bleeding Heart = Super Clean Hands".
42
You can use those lofty-sounding, off-putting labels all you want but they don't change reality:
LA Times, 3/17: http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-farms-immigration/
"Wages rise on California farms. Americans still don’t want the job
Trump’s immigration crackdown is supposed to help U.S. citizens. For California farmers, it’s worsening a desperate labor shortage."
And since California provides 50% of ALL the produce, fruit, and nuts consumed in the entire U.S., no workers = less food, higher costs -- that means for y'all in N.C. too Mr. Reilly.
7
The left unjustifiably claims the moral high ground. More like its high horse.
11
We are (I hope) still(?) a nation of laws. The courts are the proper place to adjudicate this clash between the government of the State of California (which is governing for the good of all its peoples) and the politicians (which are governing for their own self-interest). For me, I hope that we the people of the State of California win out.
7
I am a moderate. I don't believe an illegal immigrant, paying taxes, raising a family, owning a business, and otherwise, being as "American" as you or I, should be subjected to the terror that has infiltrated their lives since Trump was elected. There a many things wrong with our immigration system, that neither Trump, nor Obama are solely responsible for - we, the voters have to take responsibility for some of this mess, vis-à-vis Congress. But when the mayor took the step from not assisting, to affirmatively interfering - the left have simply gone too far off the cliff. And the sad thing is, that they probably realize it. They're aggrandizing and politicizing something that is a legal red herring. Don't believe for a moment they don't know this. They are just as responsible for inciting fear as Trump.
16
I feel the need to remind you that we have immigration laws on the books that were made by our elected officials. It was Obama who decided the laws shouldn't be enforced -- ex., no workplace roundups, only detaining serious felons, etc.
When Obama finally got around to pandering to democrats' Hispanic constituency, he created quite a mess. Cleverly, democrats are trying to turn it into Trump's problem. Not fooling anyone.
15
Gina York - "...the terror that has infiltrated their lives"
Terror, really? Those illegal aliens marching with signs DEMANDING to remain in the United States, DEMANDING their rights, don't look terrorized.
14
Interestingly enough, I'm rather sympathetic to the Trump Administration's stance on this issue.
First, immigration is in the purview of the federal government, as we Californians know from the court battle over proposition 187 (a bill which attempted to deny aliens the right to publicly funded social services, healthcare, and education among other benefits and was immediately struck down).
Second, the "Immigrant Worker Protection Act" is absurd. Currently employers cannot discriminate against persons whose documentation appears "on its face genuine" to prevent racial discrimination (ok). Now we're blocking them from actually verifying that the documentation is acceptable, and that they are hiring legally? Why? "Tax employers who hire undocumented persons" is a common liberal solution to immigration enforcement; how is this fair when they aren't allowed to learn who the undocumented persons are?
31
And CA responded today factually and clearly on point. It will go to court. As Gov Brown said “this case will take longer than Trumps presidency. That said we know this administration has it out for California number one and New York number 2. The threats to cut federal aid to California in relation to immigration laws and CA legalization of pot in conflict with federal law will create more court cases that cost CA taxpayers money. What a mess. People can’t afford gas. Highest prices in the US. The illegal immigration problem was ignored by every administration for ever except for Obama taking action with DACA which should insure a process and path to citizenship for that entire group. The larger problem are the illegals that have overstayed student or travel visas or entered the country illegally from Mexico, but also Asia and Eastern Europe. Getting here and living illegally for years doesn’t entitle them to a path to citizenship.
It’s nonsense to think that. Yet many people do. All an overgrown problem ignored for decades through both parties administrations. Mexican people are not refugees.
11
Can't stand Trump but I have to admit my state has gone overboard with the illegal immigrant issue. It is well known in CA that some judges and attorneys charge the illegals with lesser crimes than felony charges in certain circumstances so they won't be subject to deportation. Also, the illegals made the decision to come. I resent CA taxpayer's money being spent to defend them in their deportation hearings.....yes that is correct....taxpayer's money. Maybe the ACLU and other groups can donate money for their defense.
41
This is the logical followup to the Obama administration suit against Arizona. You may recall that in that case, it was determined that the feds are in charge of immigration law, not the states.
California will lose this lawsuit, if stare decisis still has any meaning.
25
It’s complicated people. The Constitution is not so black and white — proven in that so many read it differently. Its really up to our courts in so many ways.
Here’s the link to an in-depth look at the law by the bipartisan policy org. It explains exactly what laws are on the books. Pretty interesting.
https://bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/sanctuary-cities-and-immigration-detai...
3
If we don't like the current immigration laws, we need to pressure our elected representatives to change them. For the federal government to come in and change the mission of local law enforcement - from local protection and enforcement to surrogate ICE agents- is an egregious over-reach on state rights and degrades the ability of our police to do the job they signed on for. If some of the bad guys they arrest also happen to be undocumented immigrants, deal with that after they've done their time here. The violent criminals our police have to deal with should be behind bars, not on a bus back across the border. Exporting murderous narcos back to Mexico or Central America shifts the problem temporarily to those poorly equipped countries. These bad actors are an infection which degrade their home societies and then, having collected more contacts, return to the USA, bringing their ugliness back to our streets and neighborhoods. For a lot less than the cost of a 'wall' we could build decent, humane holding facilities and perhaps even give some hope to the hopeless.
5
The Justice Department should focus on the corrupt Trump administration instead of making scapegoats out of a group of people seeking asylum.
Kellyanne Conway has been found to have violated the Hatch Act, not once but twice. And don't even get me started with Jared Kushner and our mafia-linked, money laundering president, who continues to defend a country that attacked us and continues to do so with impunity.
10
I guess I missed Kellyanne's trial and the guilty finding. But carry on...
5
I don't like the current administration ONE bit.
But if conservative states started having sanctuary cities for Bakers or any other myriad of businesses who refused to serve gays, blacks, etc, usurping Federal law, how would that fare with people who think it's o.k. in this instance?
21
Wow—state’s rights are all important to Republicans, but only until they contradict our increasingly authoritarian regime.
11
The political control of CA has been taken over the undocumented immigration lobby. Not unlike Goths taking over Rome by lobbying rather than jumping over the wall.
27
Reality check vs hysteria (Trump, Sessions, GOP):
11.2 million “illegals” (less than of US pop)
124 convicted of murder after release from immigration detention between 2010-14 (.0000125% of total)
Percentage of foreign-born men in prison (mostly immigration violations): 1.6%
Percentage of US-born men in prison (violent crime): 3.3%
Foreign-born 44% less likely to commit crimes than US-born
Number of mass shootings committed by illegals: 0
Number of mass shootings committed by legals: all of them
Look in your own backyard first.
21
Thanks Canada, but that’s irrelevant to the specific immigration problem.
Too many illegals.
13
Maude - Canada. But Canada has the same free and easy consequence free immigration system right? You allow millions to come and stay undocumented with no background checks, no security checks regardless of their ability to be independent and contribute to society right? Pretty easy to accuse people of hysteria from your ivory tower up there.
11
You can freely drive five miles and become an 'illegal immigrant'.
Welcome to the United States.
Stay. Make a life. Become a citizen if you can.
Love and care about where you live and those who live there with you.
7
Meanwhile, no public concern that oil and gas drilling off the coast of California is about to resume, putting all of us, Californians and the planet, in danger...
9
Public comments on off-shore leases are open until Friday: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=BOEM-2017-0074-0001
3
Most illegal immigrants are 'criminals' only in the sense that they came across the border without their "papers in order!" One could say they 'stole' (themselves) across the border. Similarly, fugitive slaves once stole themselves and transported themselves across borders (state lines), leading to the Fugitive Slave Act and various other federal actions against them and those who abetted them. Thomas Garrett of Delaware was so convicted in federal court with Chief Justice Taney himself presiding. (Taney owned slaves and wrote the Dred Scott decision.) Garrett would have lost his house as a result but for the help of friends.
Being undocumented is a civil matter, subject to fines and other civil actions, but it should not be and should never have been a crime. Criminalizing the act of being where one is? Extentially absurd, particularly in the case of the Dreamers. We all have to be somewhere, and the USA is safer than most places. Criminal conduct involves hurting people, not picking crops, cleaning houses, and mowing lawns.
Just because an Agenda of Fear is pedaled by cowards is no reason to criminalize the act of being a fugitive, whether from slavers or ICE.
18
Please STOP comparing illegal immigrants to slaves. It's a fatuous comparison.
Slaves didn't ask to be here.
Illegal immigrants aren't slaves. For one thing, illegal immigrants are paid for their work and routinely march around my country waving foreign flags, demanding rights and spouting revanchist propaganda. No slave could do that, not one who wanted to keep all his limbs or stay alive.
No country worth living in is indifferent to which and how many people cross their borders. Maintaining a border is not in the same moral universe as enslaving someone and their children and grandchildren and descendants-raping and beating them for fun, killing them if they got "uppity" and working them for 250 years of free labor.
If you want an open border, have the guts to make an argument for that without making wildly inaccurate analogies to slavery.
21
Lilo's response assumes that all people who cross our borders without papers leave their homes voluntarily. Many do not, though some do. Many leave horrible local conditions where they lack governmental protections from drug cartels, crime, starvation, lack of clean water, etc. They seek asylum, or as the Churches calls it, 'Sanctuary'. Hence the use of that term by CA.
I do not equate them with Southern slaves of 1860. I contend that their 'inalienable rights' include the right to flee danger even if that means they cross borders into better lands. The fact that nations today do not recognise a human right to peaceful travel means that they do not actually believe in equality except for their own tribes. Today some governments hold their citizens in bondage by withholding passports and visas. (Israell does not allow Palestinians passports, for example, or consider Myanmar.) There is more to the reality of modern slavery than property ownership. Ask today's trafficed sex slaves or migrants or fishermen underpaid by people who know they are undocumented.
2
The 1850 Fugitive Slave Act comes to mind. Free states in the North were forced to watch recaptured slaves -- men, women, and children -- roped or chained together (usually 100 at a time) in coffles and walked back with occasional stops in slave pens into slave states to endure terrible suffering. Some of the African Americans were not actually slaves but were captured by U.S. marshals and slave hunters indiscriminately who also didn't mind going after dark skin children who couldn't speak and had no one to protect them. Abolitionists called the Fugitive Slave Act the Bloodhound Law since dogs might be set to track slaves.
So this is what Trump's America is -- where immigrant children are separated from their parents and penned in quarters; where law abiding people are separated from their families; where children who have grown up in the US and known no other home may be deported to strange lands; where ICE officers act like the Gestapo; and trying to force more civilized parts of the country to join the barbarians and those baying for blood.
This idea of mass deportation and mistreatment of human beings is a crime against humanity. Trump's threats are always based on bigotry and ugliness as well as immorality.
14
There ought to be a downvote button for a post this dumb.
Maintaining a border and deporting illegal immigrants is not, repeat NOT, akin to slavery or the Holocaust.
Maintaining a border IS however essential to ensuring that the United States doesn't turn into a country that is similar to undesirable countries such as Mexico or Nigeria or Guatemala or Indonesia where people have wildly different ideas about such things as age of consent, the importance of working sewage systems, or blasphemy laws.
14
By demanding Sanctuary For All on their posters, protesters turn off many democrats because their protest includes criminals who commit violent crimes.
Protests need to make sense. Keep people here who are law-abiding and people whose only 'crime' is faking a taxpayer id so they can pay taxes, and deport people guilty of violent crime.
These protesters jeopardize the good parents arrested while bringing their kids to school and the good people arrested on their way to work by standing up for gang members other violent criminals. Stop.
10
So much for States' Rights, eh? Beside, tRump never pays for anything that doesn't serve him, personally.
8
The only time the GOP is for states'rights is when it allows them to impose their own agenda on others (limiting abortion rights, church and state issues, gun rights, discrimination of all kinds, etc.)
4
1. There is legal precedent for immigration laws to be federally enforced by our states.
2. Why is sanctuary for criminals even being considered in the first place?
18
Gotta keep those nannys with no workers comp raising rich white kids, and don't even ask about what Californians would do of they had to pay 30% more for organic strawberries picked by people earning a fair wage over the 500% more they already pay for the organic tag.
15
Please show us valid, substantiated statistics that show how many able bodied US citizens show up to do this work. In other states that have applied immigration purity laws crops rot in the fields and able bodied citizens abandoned their crop picking jobs before the end of 1 day. No way to sustain the agricultural sector, but certainly supports Republican immigration purity laws.
3
The price of all produce would go up for all states, 'organic' or not. Yes, including for you in CO.
2
The truth is this action was taken because of Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf's warning to illegals that ICE was about to conduct a raid. More than 800 criminal aliens were not arrested due to her actions.
Of the 232 arrests that were made 115 had prior felony convictions for serious or violent offenses, such as child sex crimes, weapons charges and assault, or had past convictions for significant or multiple misdemeanors.
These individuals don't just commit crimes against Republicans.
Every American should want these individuals deported and a wall constructed to help prevent their return. Drugs and illegal weapons also cross this border on a daily basis.
22
117 had no criminal records other than crossing the boarder illegally. I believe the CA law includes deportation for people convicted of violent and or serious crimes. Obviously we need comprehensive immigration reform that includes paths to citizenship for people who have made a life here and a temporary worker program for employers who need workers only interested in the work not citizenship. What party is opposed to these type of solutions?
5
California, Brown and Beccera are in violation of Federal Law. The state and by attachment Brown and Beccera are in violation of 8 US Code 1324, Sections A-H which makes it a federal felony to help and assist an illegal alien. It carries a $5000 fine and up to 10 years in jail. The US Attorney in California could have them arrested and taken before a Federal judge. That is what Sessions should be instructing his US Attorneys to be doing.
11
Clearly you do not know the law.
8 USC 1324 addresses those who transport illegal immigrants across the border and knowingly assist efforts to transport said individuals within the US.
These people are commonly referred to as “coyotes”. And yes, their activities are a felony, and yes, Sessions should be enforcing the law prohibiting this activity.
5
This is great news. The only "sad" part of all of this is Governor "Moonbeam" Brown's role in promoting violations of federal immigration law so he and Becerra can curry favor to the detriment of law abiding citizens of this country. Sad.
11
Unregulated capitalism is bad
Unregulated immigration is dangerous
18
So sue us! In the end, California is a state that is trying to act with some morality. We know who picks our food in the fields, who cooks our food in the restaurants, serves us, cleans up after us, takes care of our kids us etc.etc. We need to treat people with respect. If all undocumented workers failed to show up for work for a few days, things would fall into chaos in this country. We need to work out a plan that doesn't uproot people who have lived here for years raising their families and paying taxes.
9
And some of us know ALL of the sectors you listed are some of the worst offenders for working conditions, overtime not paid, lack of oversight, lower osha and jobsite standards, mental, sexual and physical abuse not being reported (nannies).
Your bleeding hearts and wanting to save a few bucks because you can't take care of your own kids or lawn or pay a Native born person, of any color, a fair wage (white, American born migrants used to work those same fields) are not helping. They're hurting many sectors, not improving conditions or wages in the in the long run.
13
Ha, that's a laugh, agricultural business have tried to get 'American born' to work their fields -- they don't even last a day doing the manual labor!
3
Whatever happened to "States Rights?" Obviously "States Rights" has never been anything but a useful tool when Republicans needed it to block progressive ideas. We can see that Trump, Sessions, and others on the far right are continuing high level squashing of "States Rights." Unfortunate OVERREACH and SAD for Americans.
8
“ ‘At a time of unprecedented political turmoil, Jeff Sessions has come to California to further divide and polarize America,’ Mr. Brown said in a statement. ‘Jeff, these political stunts may be the norm in Washington, but they don’t work here. SAD!!!’ ”
When you frame it like that, it’s pretty hard to argue with. The Left needs a lot more of this type of framing, or re-framing, issues. Republicans have absconded with, among others, our language. We need to take it back. Well said, Governor.
6
Well said!
The reference to arresting elected officials is especially chilling.
We are slowly slipping into an authoritarian country, with no checks from the GOP.
12
I am not a Trump supporter, but I do feel California is trying to dictate which federal laws they abide by and which they don't. Passing state laws to bypass federal laws is something California should not get away with. I don't care how "liberal" the state is, federal law is still the rule of the land.
The US welcomes immigrants to our country. Immigrants who applied for Visas and filled out the proper paperwork. We open our doors widely and warming to all who shall enter.
Illegal immigrants is an entirely different matter. Immigrants who crossed the border in the middle of night; snuggled in by car, bus or semi-truck, hiding from authorities are illegals. They should be deported.
The problem is, those illegals come back three or four times, because all we do is deport them back to their original country. The second time an illegal immigrant is caught, they should be jailed for their crime. What we need to do, is to enforce our federal laws, not by pass them.
If California wants to protect illegal immigrants through state laws, then fine. But all federal funds should be pulled from their state for violating federal laws. If Californians lost their federal funding, I wonder just how long tax payers would cover the cost of illegal immigrants in their state. I am assuming the duration would be quite short.
20
Since California is in rebellion against the United States, President Trump should send in federal troops to take over the state government. I believe this action would enjoy tremendous popular support.
7
A policy that encourages illegal immigration is costly to both the immigrants California's citizens and legal residents.
Immigrants risk their lives hiring coyotes sneak them into California. If they can find work, many are exploited by unscrupulous employers. The illegals compete with citizens and legal residents for housing. Anyone aware of the homeless problem in California's big cities?
Jerry and Xavier should reveal the true cost of encouraging illegal immigration. How much are Californians paying for the state's ultra liberal policies? How many illegals are in prison, or the state's county jails?
The Rule of Law must be honored. It is abhorrent that Californians can be punished for cooperating with other Americans (ICE) if they try to obey immigration laws.
12
This is exactly what happens when "some people" attempt to blur the difference between legal immigration, which Americans applaud, and the illegal, criminal invasion of the United States by foreigners.
Those who wish to discuss the merits of legal immigration, which accounts for over one million new legal resident immigrants in America each and every year, must also recognize that millions of foreigners have "immigrated" illegally into the United States. One should never conflate legal immigrants with those foreigners who have and continue to violate US laws.
What US laws are American citizens in California able to ignore with the backing and blessing of California politicians?
41
Thank God the federal government is finally doing something. It is about time someone tried to stop these law breaking, self serving politicians from trying to cede from the union. They are creating their own rules to give rights to illegal aliens and thereby grow their own support base with criminals.
25
While I have listened to your statement and do agree on some parts, I want to clarify something. The Trump administration is finally cracking down on illegal immigration, something California is trying to curb the efforts of. This is where most people diverge in the way of ideas. Some will immediately claim all immigrants here illegally are criminals and should be deported. Others will state that the illegal immigrants are law-abiding residents like you or me. California is seeking to protect the law-abiding immigrants here in the US illegally from deportation. This does not mean every illegal immigrant, including those convicted of crimes and felonies. If ICE and the Department of Justice were to ask California for assistance in deporting those with past convictions, I'm sure California would be more than happy to help. This is only my point of view. You are entitled to your own.
2
The federal government already lost on this exact issue at the supreme court in 1997. Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997). In that case the federal government, through the Brady Act, required state and local police to help do background checks for gun purchases and to report any contraindicating information to the federal database. The court found that the federal government could not commandeer (require by law) the resources of states to perform or assist federal actions.
12
The article provides a link to the Justice Department's explanation of why the Printz v. United States ruling does not apply. It because the federal isn't asking California to enforce immigration laws; it is asking California to stop obstructing federal officials who are attempting to enforce immigration laws,
7
Wile I'm no fan of President Trump, he is doing something the previous administrations refused to do. Uphold immigration law. The failure of previous administrations to uphold this is why we have all of these problems.
Let's not mince words. The real reason little to nothing was done is because of the benefit of low cost labor. Yes, we do have legal mechanisms for people to enter the country but the levels were no where close to the real demand. There is nothing wrong with with upholding laws. People want change? Don't break the laws, change them.
28
Hitler got rid of many of the Jewish people, too, Mark. Think.
Do YOU want to pick produce for pennies? Immigrants have always provided "cheap" labor and we should thank them - not try to destroy them.
12
California agricultural interests have a long history of exploiting and abusing migrant labor back to Steinbeck's Grapes of Wrath. I fear recent CA legislation just perpetuates this. We need a complete rethink of our immigration system that substantially expands temporary visas for migrants and offers protection under the law. Not this disfunctional animosity between state and federal authorities.
18
@njglea - I picked produce after getting out of college for a year. Helped in my transition to other work. Many people used to do this in many areas of the U.S. (Apples in New England like me). You obviously never have. Relative Wages have gone and oversight DOWN in many fields since the huge illegal influx in the 90's (meatpacking).
Your comment shows how, although many people may have a "good bleeding heart", there is a class bias built in to Liberal thoughts on work, as most Liberal people are educated and never got their hands dirty and or look down on it. There is actually some racism instilled in your comments "let those poor unwashed masses do it for pennies, poor things."
Wages, conditions and interest in working in many areas, will improve if we level the playing field and keep the "race to the bottom" that illegal wages put on a sector, out of them.
5
Keebler Elf seeking approval and appeasing his boss, Toddler-in-Chief,who's repeatedly thwarted him for altering his whole game plan. And of course what better way to prove loyalty to his agenda than make an example of the one place he'll likely never get approval he yearns!
A bit surprised the didn't go after his hometown NY considering it seems like they barely venture there anymore...well,at least openly.
4
are people in the administration aware that more people live in sanctuary states and cities than live elsewhere?
are they aware that more federal taxes are collected from sanctuary locals than the rest?
4
So? Should I have greater rights just because I pay more in federal taxes than my neighbor? Sounds like a great argument for the 1% to rule the world.
7
It's not clear, to me at least, why the Trump Administration has decided to sue California. If they believe California's governor, attorney general, various mayors, etc., are obstructing justice and the enforcement of federal statutes then the DOJ should be seeking criminal indictments against these individuals. That said, very little of what's going on in this country currently makes a whole lot of sense.
2
TheraP says, in the favorite comment, "What do you call a nation at war with its own citizens? Certainly not United!"
WE THE PEOPLE are not at war with each other. Hate radio/social media, fox so-called news, Russia and the Robber Barons want us to fight with each other. They foster hate-anger-fear-Lies, Lies,Lies- death-destruction-rape-pillage-plunder ideas because war is profitable for them.
WE are the only ones who can/will stop them and we can start by not fighting with each other, picking the one thing we value most in the life we have enjoyed and fight like hell to preserve/restore it.
The people who disagree with Socially Conscious Women and men right now will thank us when we stop this forced march to destruction.
5
A modest proposal : withdraw all Federal officials from border and customs duty at all California ports of entry, including airports.
Hey, if you don't want the feds in your business, try doing without them altogether.
16
I wish that reporting on the "sanctuary city" issue would distinguish between places that merely have "don't ask/don't tell" policies and those that actively obstruct the enforcement of federal law.
The former makes sense, because you don't want witnesses or victims to be afraid to call the police, or the fire department, or go for healthcare when they have potentially contagious illnesses, etc. It's a public safety issue.
However, actively blocking the detention or removal of people who have been adjudicated to be here in violation of law, especially those with criminal records or other risk factors for the community, crosses the line.
13
What is the difference between a citizen who has an active arrest warrant against them and an illegal immigrant with a deportation order?
Why should we give special consideration to those violating immigration laws and not to citizens who have violated laws? Wouldn't their cooperation be a public safety issue as well?
12
That "Immigrant Worker Protection Act" one is a doozy. That's the equivalent of barring the IRS from auditing your W-4's. I-9's are federally required employment records under the purview of DHS. Restricting federal ability to review I-9's is outside the state of California's authority, irrespective of whether you are pro or con illegal immigration.
15
Why would anyone or state want millions of illegal entrants into their country?
31
So U.S. consumers can afford to buy most foods: poultry, meat products, produce and get construction projects done, especially lately in hurricane-ravaged areas AND do jobs most 'white Americans' do not want to do.
Millions of undocumented workers also pay into SSI, etc. of which they will never see a return (and those funds are accumulating by the billions in the U.S. coffers).
4
To fill low skilled and low paid jobs that most Americans shun.
How many native born Americans aspire to be dishwashers, pick seasonal produce, clean hotel rooms, etc.?
1
@DTTM whole sectors of Highschool and college kids used to rely on seasonal produce picking jobs on breaks in many parts of the U.S.. It was a right of passage and good money. Regular old U.S, born people wanted them too, for one reason -money.
I've done ALL of the work you just listed (white middle class guy here), while attending school and after and was thankful for it. Yours is such an Ivory tower viewpoint of the world while trying to seem caring.
Your class bias toward hard work, written all over your comment and "bleeding heart, clean hands" comments just like yours, Really, really sick of that trope in comments like yours, demeaning work that I once did, (and still do) with pride as "nobody want's it", Such classism. "Bleeding Heart=Super Clean Hands".
6
Yea, let's go ahead and flaunt federal law so that Blue-staters can continue to enjoy the services of illegals being paid, under the table, below-market compensation. As an added bonus, the resulting permanent economic underclass will add to the Democrat voting base.
33
Flout.
Please learn the distinction between flout and flaunt.
Your argument loses all strength when you cannot use the language correctly.
The divides in this country are truly sad.
6
So when the feds are involved in places like Utah, Republicans scream "States' Rights!" but when it's California, the feds take precedence? Got it.
17
Or is it because when the feds are involved in places like Utah, Democrats scream that the feds take precedence, but when it's California Democrats scream "States' Rights!" Got it.
4
Governor Brown Making the entire state of California a sanctuary for illegal aliens even those who have broken the law is the really absurd "Political Stunt".
27
Yo,
Article VI Clause II of your very own Constitution is called ... the Supremacy Clause, and it upholds the laws of the United States. Im only 12 years old so what do I know.
19
California knows that that the Supremacy Clause applies to all states- the laws of the federal government are superior to state law. They joined the union and are stuck with it unless they want to amend the US Constitution.
27
No state may enact laws that supersede those of the federal government, to do so is sedition. We did fight a civil war over this; the federal government won thereby dashing the cause of states rights forever. No state has the ability to set its own immigration policies as immigration is strictly the responsibility of the Federal government. This move is long overdue, it is past time to bring these states to heal.
28
In liberal land, state and local law enforcement may not enforce immigration law as it is federal jurisdiction. Now federal law enforcement may not enforce laws that conflict with state law... in a state where State senator Kevin de Leon has openly bragged of helping his relatives enter the US illegally.
16
Sans a comprehensive immigration policy this is what happens. At some point we need to determine the status of all 11 million 'illegals' in the US, a percentage of them who have broken the law to some degree or other. The current sweep underway does not just ferret out those with a criminal record but any and all who get caught in the net. So states like CA are attempting to slow down this broad sweep hoping to limit it to those with serious criminal records and spare those who don't, at least until a comprehensive plan is in place.
7
All immigrant who have entered the country without authorization or who have overstayed their visas are subject to deportation. Nearly all adult illegal immigrants are also guilty of posing as U.S. citizens to gain employment. U.S. immigration law calls for the deportation of all "illegal aliens."
17
There is absolutely no disincentive to sneaking into the country if only serious criminals are deported. As long as there is a low probability of consequences, the flow of illegals will continue. Of course, the open borders crowd - employers and progressives - have no interest in discouraging the border crossers.
4
It's not their country. Send them home. Every last single one.
And start with the illegal immigrants who have the audacity to go on television and lecture US citizens about what we had better do..
4
When schools in the South were desegregated, I seem to recall (even as a child) that Federal Marshalls enforced the law.
CA is not interfering with Federal Enforcement. What’s Sessions problem?
5
Perhaps Sessions should use his office and prosecute folks like Jared Kushner having access to White House secret documents for well over a year without the proper security clearance, not to mention him trotting around the globe making deals with foreign heads of state to enrich himself and his wife. There's your crime Mr. Attorney General.
11
But Kushner and his wife have young children. The federal government would be breaking up their family and why, when they are otherwise law abiding?
3
And our wonderful White House full of hypocrites can justify allowing states to not obey the laws of the Affordable Care Act? And propose legislation to further undermine the law?
8
Last weeks "hero of integrity" is off on his rampage. Humiliated by Trump
he keeps beating on those he has (hopefully only temporary) power over. Physical, political power. Certainly not moral or soul power. Sessions is willing to take all types of insults if he can traumatize as many dark skinned people as he can get away with. The payoff is just way too gratifying to give up.
3
“I’m worried about the ‘Dreamers,’ hard-working immigrant families and law-abiding people who are just trying to make their way like the rest of us,” Mayor Darrell Steinberg
we do realize that these "hard working, law abiding people" became criminals when they entered the country illegally?
27
A 2 week old Mexican baby is brought to the states, goes to school, often speaks little Spanish, grows up, gets a college degree, buys a home, starts a family, breaks no laws -- is a criminal? That's absurd. Time to spend our resources going after REAL criminals.
I thought Republicans were for States Rights?
2
The GOP only believes in States Rights when it comes to allowing voter suppression.
3
Trump won't be able to bully Brown, Becerra and California. Go home Trump and Sessions and do some meaningful work for the American people.
2
California is very generous with its welfare, providing it to many whom other states would turn down. Despite this, California has more people living in poverty than any other state. The Census Bureau (with help from the Bureau of Labor Statistics) publishes a yearly Supplemental Poverty Measure which takes into account government programs designed to help the poor. Even when all of California’s generous welfare programs have been taken into account, California still has the highest number of people living in poverty - one out of every 5 people.
On the Census Bureau’s web site is a page titled “The Supplemental Poverty Measure: 2016” by Liana Fox (revised 2017). Its last appendix lists the states and tells the percentage of poverty in each, when government aid programs have been taken into account. In California, that percentage is 20.4%. The average across the country is only 14%.
Below the glitter, California has wide swaths of 3rd world poverty.
20
Why can't we find some sort of reasonable middle ground? Local Law Enforcement doesn't have jurisdiction over immigration (a Federal Law) hence they do not as some commenters have suggested pick up people who are only guilty of immigration-related offenses. So why not share the names of any people who are convicted of a crime. Suspects should be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Witnesses and complainants shouldn't have their information shared to protect them (not just in case they are undocumented themselves but also in case of reprisals from criminals).
And frankly, I don't care if the crime an immigrant is convicted of is "minor." There should be a higher standard than lowest common denominator. Liberals love to cite old studies about immigrants committing crimes at a lower rate than the native born population, yet they seem very concerned about protecting what's supposedly about 4% of the immigrant community. Something clearly doesn't add up.
Those people who truly want to come here, work hard, and be an asset to their communities shouldn't be on ICE's radar. But if you come here and you think you have license to start bar fights, get DUIs, shoplift, vandalize things and join gangs, then you should be deported immediately. This doesn't need to be complicated...
8
" Liberals love to cite old studies about immigrants committing crimes at a lower rate than the native born population …”
Legal immigrants commit crimes at far lower rates than the native population. There are no hard figures on the crimes committed by the undocumented. Some reports have purported to show that the undocumented commit fewer crimes (or more crimes), but they all were based on different (and dubious) assumptions which had more to do with the researchers’ biases than with reality.
In addition, some government prosecutors have decided not to bring charges for minor crimes, and to reduce the charges they would otherwise bring against undocumented people (if possible) so that the alleged criminals will not be deported. Washington State gives drivers’ licenses to the undocumented. The prosecutor in my county (King County, Wa.) went on the radio to say he has not been prosecuting the undocumented for misdemeanors, and that (on an individual basis) he is deciding whether to lower the charges he makes against them for felonies. For example, an undocumented student who had been driving with a blood alcohol level over twice the legal limit was charged only with reckless driving.
In sum, the number and severity of crimes committed by the undocumented is unknown.
8
Lots of luck. By the time this lawsuit gets resolved, Sessions will be long gone, along with his boss. At that point, saner, less clueless folks will (fingers crossed) be in power.
4
ICE has been confiscating minor children from their parents at the boarder as a way to terrorize the parents. They have been “capturing” hardworking undocumented people who come into their offices for help. So far I have yet to hear of them actually deporting anyone we would call a criminal element. You need to remember that California is a huge agricultural state, highly dependent on undocumented workers to plant and harvest the crops. We all are dependent on those workers to feed our families. It’s about time we stopped the charade, ask the growers how many workers they need, and issue green cards for that number of workers. They are doing work no one else wants to do.
6
Finally, some rational sanity.
1
I sincerely hope the courts will stand up for American citizens in CA and find in favor of the feds against our corrupt CA politicians who do not protect our safety or resources and have the nerve to take money out of our pockets and leave essential infrastructure work undone to protect and serve those who are not citizens and are here illegally.
22
What if the State of California could legally hire undocumented workers to work on infrastructure projects? Perhaps by issuing green cards. They would't be eligible to vote or collect welfare but they would be obligated to pay Federal and state income taxes on their earnings.
Two birds, one stone.
Yes, I know, that would take heavy toil road and bridge work jobs away from white college educated young Americans. On the other hand, perhaps that would make more lettuce and grape picking jobs open to the same three piece suited white kids!! (written tongue in cheek).
1
one can collect welfare as a green card holder.
1
Illegals make up 15-20% of CA residents. They DO vote there. They drive up housing costs, school costs, law enforcement costs. At some point, the few remaining actual citizens will awaken and ask "Why are we funding criminals?" I'm not sure when this will happen, but it is coming.
29
It will take a lot to get Californians to rise up against this outrage. Too many have been thoroughly cowed by accusations of racism and xenophobia for daring to question the wisdom of illegal immigration.
15
It’s one thing to restrict public officials/employees from providing information to ICE without legal legitimacy, i.e., a Court order, etc. But my take is that restricting private businesses from communicating with any agency of the federal government goes too far. A private employer, to the extent federal law permits, may reject ICE entry without legal process, but I do not think the State can penalize a private business from cooperating with the feds if it voluntarily chooses to do so.
I’d appreciate reading contrary views.
10
I can't see how the public is harmed or anyone's "rights" violated when state and federal authorities work together to detain people here illegally who have or are suspected of a crime.
19
Good. It is long past time.
In 1994, immigration advocates eviscerated Prop 187 on the ground that the federal government had sole authority to administer immigration policy. How times have changed.
11
I guess I may have missed something, but I think that sanctuary laws are enacted to help fight real crime. If someone who comes here illegally witnesses a crime, or someone plotting a terrorist attack, do they report it? If they are the victim of a crime, do they report it?
Is it better to have real terrorists and criminals go free?
In Trump's world: Yes.
3
So which laws am I, as a citizen, exempt from so I will cooperate with law enforcement to protect my community? Tax laws? ID fraud? DUI?
Why should illegal aliens be given special legal exemptions when citizens who have active arrest warrants against them would not be given the same consideration?
7
Why no mention of the Obama administration lawsuit against Arizona's immigration laws in 2010? When that lawsuit was filed, AG Holder said this:
“Setting immigration policy and enforcing immigration laws is a national responsibility,” Holder said. “Seeking to address the issue through a patchwork of state laws will only create more problems than it solves.”
Seems pertinent to this situation, no?
15
The big difference between us Californians and the Trump/Sessions crowd, is that we love and embrace our diversity ~ we love our Mexican neighbors, they are the backbone of our agriculture that feeds the country, their hard-working spirit that embodies honesty and integrity has long been respected and has enriched our culture in countless ways. I feel sorry for Sessions and Trump, who are so filled with their hateful racism, they actually expect us Californians to hate and become racists just like them! How pathetic! ~ They are in fact the ones who are the most unwelcome here, and should keep their hateful racism to themselves.
7
If your Mexican neighbors are here illegally, then they in fact are criminals and without integrity. Abetting such criminals calls into question the integrity of state officials. Immigrants who are here illegally need to go home, now.
20
I love my neighbor, too, but I don't invite him to invade my home, take my job, or live off my taxes.
9
Immigration is making California less diverse, not more diverse. Mexican Americans are already California largest ethnic group. Nationwide, they outnumber all other U.S. ethnic groups except German Americans, whom they will soon surpass. Mexican Americans already outnumber Irish Americans and Italian Americans.
8
From the Complaint:
The Supremacy Clause of the Constitution mandates that “[t]his Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof . . . shall be the supreme Law of the Land . . . any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” U.S. Const., art. VI, cl. 2. Thus, a state enactment is invalid if it “stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress,” Hines v. Davidowitz, 312 U.S. 52, 67 (1941), or if it “discriminate[s] against the United States or those with whom it deals,” South Carolina v. Baker, 485 U.S. 505, 523 (1988).
The Supremacy Clause does not grant to the federal government Supreme Power to regulate state and local matters, however. Nor does it grant to the federal government the power to conscript state and local law enforcement officers or government officials to enforce federal laws. Quite the contrary.
Maurice F. Baggiano, Member of the Bar of the U.S. Supreme Court
5
The article provides a link to the Justice Department lawsuit, which detail the Justice Department argument that the Supremacy Claus does not apply. Basically, the argument is that the federal government is not asking California to enforce federal immigration laws; it is asking California to stop shielding illegal immigrants by obstructing federal immigration officer
4
Good. Q: Who supports sanctuary cities? A: Illegal immigrants and the democrats who need their votes. Should have happened long ago.
18
"illegal" immigrants can't vote.
if you believe they do, in any meaningful numbers, let's see some research proving this common but specious claim. this is straigy out of the Republican playbook: manipulation of voting patterns and rolls sesoned with a good helping of prejudice and fear. of course, it's phony.
2
We currently live in the Disunited States of America. Perhaps it's time to formalize the split between the Enlightened States and what others have called the Moocher States, those who take more from the federal government than they contribute. Let's see how well they do on their own, without immigration, and paying the cost of Trump's tariffs to trade with the Enlightened States.
Sure, this is far-fetched, but it doesn't seem as far as it used to.
5
If the Ninth Circuit is involved in this one, Trump may as well assume this suit will fail. That court is the most left-wing in the land and couldn't make an objective decision under any circumstances.
11
it seems that Jeff Sessions is not familiar with the 10th amendment of the Constitution. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people". This amendment, as interpreted by the Supreme Court (most recently in 1992, New York vs the United States) purports that the federal government cannot compel local or state agencies to enforce Federal laws (a states' rights amendment). It looks as though the Constitution of the United States is just another document that Mr Sessions "cannot recall". Maybe he should bone up on the law if he wants to be a competent AG. But again competency in Mr Trump's cabinet is indeed a rare thing.
10
As a small business owner I see the recent immigration sanctuary laws as yet another obstacle for my business. California expects every small business to have a lawyer on hand in order to deal with Federal Immigration Enforcement Officers. I firmly believe the way the law is written most of it will be struck down.
13
Under the constitution, immigration matters are the sole responsibility of the federal government. The States have no duty to enforce immigration laws, nor any duty to cooperate with federal enforcement. The fact that it may be easier and less expensive for the federal government to try to force the States to do their work for them is not relevant. The odd fact is that, once again, Trump is more interested in punishing his enemies than he is in doing the job he was elected to.
8
Its very bad example of not respecting Election mandate and unconstitutional, In 21st century also how they come illegal and yet ask for all rights, People from other countries has to follow toughest standards to come here, It makes natural to understand laws and language, When I see few of them they don't understand even language keep talking in their own language and still defend their rights In third world countries borders are shielded with walls and fencing and do not allow anybody to cross illegally for terrorist threats and other issues, Here in this country they want to keep all as is and jump in when they want and use whatever means to live they want , Not sure how in 21st century justified crossing border and coming illegal and still justifying, As country now fully has laws , How it justified and other places its not legal as well as punishment or death in some cases as security forces has right in other countries. And yet California and other states defending, Now given rise to AI and other technologies Automation , There will be far reaching consequences in low level tech jobs getting wiped, And affect all other , And which in turn who will give aid to all in future and become burden to any state.
2
Exactly how many immigrants can the US admit and support annually?
100,000? 1,000,000? 2,000.000? Would this number increase or decrease according to political leadership? What are the benefits of illegal immigration? What is the downside? Do most immigrants desire citizenship or are they here for the money? Should there be an easier way to become a citizen? Should worker visa holders be allowed to bring in their families? Is there a way to track immigrants here on expired tourist visas? What should be the punishment for people who are deported multiple times, costing US taxpayers?
We must solve the immigration problem soon because we can't answer any of the above questions.
6
The immigration debate and the hardline tactics taken by this administration, remind me of federal laws enacted to protect slave owners and the institutions of slavery. Remember the addition of the second section of
the 4th article of the Constitution? "No person held to service or labor in one state under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or
labor may be due.” Current immigration laws, like the 4th Article of the Constitution, aim to punish those seeking sanctuary and those offerimg protection against unjust laws. May history teach to find a better way forward, and dignity be our guide.
3
What do you think is unjust about U.S. law that apply to illegal immigration?
1
California and New York, economic powerhouses that prop up the moocher red states, thrive with the energy, dreams, and hard work of immigrants.
We treasure the tradition of our nation that welcomes and, yes, rescues, the dreams of devoted families of strivers from around the world, who in turn treasure the opportunities that the USA has given them, and, through generations continue to give back to America many fold the opportunity that we gave to them,
If the Red States want to put up borders between themselves and the thriving blue states to keep our hard-working immigrants out, fine. We will put up guards on the other side of you borders to block those among you who profit from trafficking deadly weapons of war into our hard-working states.
12
California and New York would not be economic powerhouses if they had to pay full freight for the health and welfare costs, infrastructure, emergency funds..... they now get from the federal government.
And what would NY and CA do with all the tens of millions of deadly weapons of war now already held legally and illegally in those states?
Are you really willing to secede over people, however hard working, who feel entitled to live outside the laws and collective responsibilities of the community?
4
reply to CNNNNC:
We do pay full freight--the funds just cycle through the federal government, which skims off a large chunk to send to the red states. We were willing to help our less fortunate neighbors, but as they persist in attacking us, capturing and kicking out beloved members of our communities, while mooching off us and draining our resources, this willingness is becoming strained.
I did not say "secede"--I just offered to let the red states put up walls between us if they want to separate themselves from the immigrants who contribute to our communities, rather than have them separate loving families who live within our thriving states.
3
Here in CT, our economy is stagnant except at the top where they are all for allowing more illegal immigrants in to mow the lawns and care for the kids. Off the books naturally while the middle and working class neighborhoods or what's left of them pay higher local taxes for the expanding school budgets, deal with illegal housing, 'pick up' job sites and crowded doc in the box. Those who use the illegal labor pool pay for 'concierge service' healthcare of course.
Why should Greenwich get the benefits while Stamford pays for the financial and social costs? Why should citizens be prosecuted for laws illegal immigrants are exempt from - income taxes, healthcare, insurance, ID fraud....I'm a hard working person too who loves and contributes to my community but I can't choose to wantonly break laws that are inconvenient to my own advancement.
23
There is no locality in the US where any authority, sanctuary city or not, will refuse to carry out legal orders.
The issue here is due process. In the past and often at many levels of government there is a kind of cooperation that ignores technical requirements of due process when it comes to citizens. The ask for documentation is in fact an ask to prove they did not stand on due process and ignore illegal improperly made requests for holds or personal information. That is the issue at hand.
The feds want unencumbered by due process, freedom to act as they see fit. The localities have chosen to protect themselves from legal jeopardy by insisting that the feds do things by the book. Which means they should file correct papers for holding a person instead of placing a phone call or writing a request and making a demand which is, without the correct legal papers, an extra legal activity that puts these localities ar risk of lawsuit. Business also have a legal obligation even before the new law to make sure the government made a proper legal request for information before giving it otherwise they are open to legal action against them.
The Law & Order GOP/Sessions is complaining that they are being asked to follow the law.
What Mayor Schaaf did is no different than CHIP informing the public daily where they will be concentrating on traffic enforcement. We have self government not imposed government. It is clear that the GOP/Sessions/El Trumpo would prefer imposed government.
16
From the majority of the negative and anti-California comments in this forum, there seems to be a misunderstanding of what the 3 California laws are intended to do.
Under the laws, state and local agencies would not be able to detain immigrants for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement based on “hold” requests, something many departments already stopped doing after a 2014 court ruling. Subpoenas and court orders would be honored and followed, not mere requests.
Electronic fingerprint records for all offenders booked into state prisons and local jails will continue going to the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security.
Police and sheriffs will continue sharing inmates’ release dates and transferring people to immigration authorities if they have been convicted within the last 15 years of one of roughly 800 offenses outlined in the Trust Act. That California law prohibits state and local law enforcement from holding people past their release dates for federal immigration agents unless they’ve been convicted of certain crimes.
Those certain crimes include all serious and violent crimes, registered sex and arson offenses, domestic violence charges and other felonies. They also cover many nonviolent offenses and “wobblers” — crimes that can be charged as either a felony or misdemeanor.
14
This sounds like civil war. Well, at least California is civil
8
The California law is designed to enable the State to better enforce its state laws, most particularly its criminal laws. When people are afraid to call the police because they or their families may be deported, violent criminals are free to act without consequence. California has lawfully decided that it wants people to report crimes instead of just hiding. The State has also properly decided that it does not want to be forced to defend lawsuits brought by people who are arrested by ICE and confined for years without cause. ICE makes law enforcement more difficult, not better.
Second there is Supreme Court precedent exactly on point which provides that the federal government is responsible for enforcing federal laws and it cannot force states to"deputize" state law enforcement personnel to do that job. The federal government may not punish states for refusing to cooperate with federal law enforcement agents by withholding federal funds unrelated to the action in question. There have been repeated suits over this and California has successfully challenged the Trump administration for threatening to withhold federal funds over rules which forbid collusion with ICE officials. The only unfortunate possibility is that the US Supreme Court, as now politicized, is only too willing to ignore or reverse established precedent, particularly when it comes to immigration. It is sad when we have to hope for justice, not expect it.
11
you do realize that "the people who are afraid to call the police because they might be deported" are also criminals.
we are a nation of laws. an individual or group of individuals (read: california) cannot unilaterally decide which laws can be followed and which can just be ignored. what if a group of individuals in ny (read: mafia) decide homicide and extortion are ok and some bought and paid for politicians agree and rewrite the laws to protect them.
enacting these laws in california, which completely subvert federal laws amounts to treason.
12
Spot on and the rest of what I could not say with my 1500 words.
1
These laws should be attacked and are unconstitutional to the extent that they shield undocumented aliens from removal. What is ironic is that the legal argument has flipped from immigration to being an exclusive federal concern to the proposition that the states have some interest in regulating illegal immigrants within their boundaries. In 1994, California voters enacted Proposition 187, which basically instituted a state run immigration system that was intended to remove illegal aliens. A federal district court declared the state statute unconstitutional on the ground that the Constitution reserved expressly immigration to the federal government. Governor Gray Davis, who was inaugurated in the midst of the litigation, instructed his attorney general to dismiss the Ninth Circuit appeal. However, the Ninth Circuit later used that reasoning to invalidate a similar Arizona statute. Now states, faced with a federal government that intends to enforce this nation's immigration laws, have switched field, arguing that there is a place for state regulation of immigrants. Most of teh provisions of the California statutes, intended to interfere with federal enforcement of immigration, are plainly unconstitutional. The government may not be able to deputize local law enforcement under the Tenth Amendment, but states cannot interfere with legitimate immigration enforcement, such as requests to detain aliens in their custody or to turn such aliens over to ICE agents.
19
When Mr. Homan, a public official, notes " can't make these decisions and be unaccountable for people dying" does he also include President Trump?As well as vast numbers of elected and selected policy makers, local, regional and in DC, who do not take personal responsibility? For their words and deeds?Daily! Which enable our toxic WE-THEY culture. Visible as well as less well knowns, who remain unaccountable for not doing and saying what is necessary to create and sustain a life style seeding and harvesting mutual respect? Much needed mutual trust? In safe environments of Menschlichkeit, at home? In our neighborhoods and communities? At school, work, leisure, prayer, socializing, and just BEING?
Does this salaried public servant take any personal responsibility for the outcomes of his words and deeds?
2
The focus on the deportation of immigrants who lack the proper paperwork but have lived, worked, paid taxes and raised families in the US has been the focus Trump’s wrath since his campaign began, ironically despite the fact he has employed the same people to work his various properties. However, xenophobia is an easy vote getter among the uneducated and as any undergraduate could tell you was used to historical proportions in Europe in the 20th century and America in the 19th century to a lesser degree.
If the AG wants to have a go at California, as a testing ground for other states that will not be bullied by the xenophobic policies of the administration, go for it. I want to see the AGs go face to face in court with Dreamers, hardworking men and women who do jobs that have helped revive the California economy.
When a law or policy is wrong a moral person stands against it. California did that.
8
I would quietly propose from the sidelines that, since Trump ‘n the gang demonstrate daily that they do not give one hoot about “laws”, California should just continue to do the right thing by humanity regardless of what the outcome of this is. Oh, and states’ rights. And “Don’t tread on me”. Hypocrites.
5
Dear Attorney General Sessions, please add my name to the defendants in the law suit against California you filed yesterday.
/s/ Thomas DeVries
8
Just another baldfaced political move by a Trump appointee designed to fire up the rabid base before the next round of Mueller indictments hit the street... These shameless goons don’t care how much pain they inflict on the poor and powerless on their mission to spread hate, fear, and division in America.
10
I blame Congress. Totally. There are 3 immigration issues that have been ignored, used, played for political gain.
Legal immigration and updating, modifying.
DACA immigrants brought here as kids, with no say, no illegality attached directly to them.
All other illegal immigration, including the law-abiding and the criminals...
I see Democrats trying to blur the 3 separate issues while Republicans do the same- each for their own bases, while nothing gets resolved.
Republicans are wrong to address legal immigration with racial or economic profiling. A broad based, fair, inclusive policy can work. Do it.
DACA is a no- brainer for both Parties. Citizenship now. But not the parents, who put them in this horrible limbo.
Illegal - sorry, but here is where I part company with Dems- we can’t have open borders, now at what- ten million since our supposedly one-time amnesty. But targeting blue states....uhh, what about those sanctuary businesses in red states? What about their responsibility, there advantages under E-Verify?
Congress, get off your duff and do something! All I see is you taking one break after another, playing games, solving none of our problems. Perhaps we need to put a work requirement in federal salaries legislation- now seemingly a welfare project for do-nothings.
15
Dual sovereignty is principal constitutional value. The Federal government is supreme in some areas and in all others the states are supreme. But there is a fuzzy boundary between the two. But, immigration violations 1) are not criminal. They are civil violations of federal law; and 2) states have broad discretion in regulating civil affairs and the activities of their own law enforcement agencies. Examples: Southern states declined to assist or enforce federal civil rights laws for a very long time, some western states have declined to assist the federal government regarding intrusions on federal land by their residents. Strange as it may seem this contest is the newest battleground in the determination of what constitutes 'States Rights"; this time exercised for progressive values rather than regressive values like segregation.
10
States may have broad discretion in regulating civil affairs but they do not have the right to selectively enforce their own laws by some perceived political advantage or to grant whole defined groups exemptions.
If I don't pay my income taxes, car insurance.....I face legal consequences. The state will not exempt me from any law simply because I'm looking to make a better life for myself.
When CT prosecutes citizens for tax evasion, work and wage violations, licensing laws.... but not illegal immigrants, that is a degradation of citizens basic civil rights.
States have discretion over civil affairs but they cannot wantonly favor one defined group over another.
17
Sorry CNNNC. but CT does enforce its laws on illegal immigrants as do other states, what states are not obliged to do is enforce federal non criminal laws.
Perhaps California should be thinking of the money made in California is being sent out to other countries that could help their own community fight homelessness, drug abuse, crime, children living under the poverty line. Propping up Mexico’s GDP by 2% with funds transferred by undocumented immigrants is one reason Mexico has no incentive to pay for a wall or secure it’s own boarders. Having grown up in Mexico, the Mexican government has to get serious about its own crime, joblessness, and standard of living for it’s own citizens, by getting rid of corrupt practices within it’s own government, and keep it’s nose out of our government laws. https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/mark-browne/survey-shows-most-billi...
18
So much for those "states rights" conservatives. They only push "states rights" when they want to discriminate or restrict voting.
9
Suddenly, the Democrats who run California are champions of states rights over federal law. Illegal immigration is no longer illegal there, simply at the whim of the left wing politicians in Sacramento. When a state can pick and choose which federal laws it will obey, it's time for the federal government to play hardball and withhold federal funding. And then we can shut down California's greedy access to Colorado River water. After all, if Californians are thirsty, why is that the responsibility of the law abiding states where the water originates?
20
Perhaps read this article and consult a map, Paul. Colorado has a similar law, not to mention that a lot of runoff from California mountains feeds into the Colorado.
How long before the Trump Administration declares Marshall Law in blue states, and calls out the military on its own citizens? The hypocrisy of the GOP knows no bounds. State's rights only apply to red states who reliable vote for these clowns.
10
The word is "martial", and the president has no such power. Any attempt to impose martial law on United States territory would be unconstitutional. Let us therefore hope the answer to your question is: never.
9
I missed the complaints when Obama sued Arizona over its immigration policies.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/07/us/07immig.html
24
Just because you don't understand the legal nuances between the two situations doesn't exactly mean they don't exist. In fact, the two cases present precisely opposite scenarios which is why this lawsuit will fail. The Federal government is solely responsible for enforcing federal laws (including immigration laws). While the Feds can entice States into cooperation by offering them money, weapons, services, etc. in exchange for their cooperation, the Feds (generally) can't force states to take on responsibilities of enforcing federal law. That's why this lawsuit will ultimately fail.
In the Arizona cases, the State was trying to usurp the Federal government by enacting its own immigration laws. The courts said (and it has long been the law) that where the federal government has (lawfully) enacted laws that already regulate in an area of national concern, individual states can't independently act to contradict the Feds. These are fundamentally different situations, but in fact the reasoning of the Arizona cases will ultimately likely be used to defeat this new case by the Trump administration.
4
Hey, California, weren't you considering secession? Take me with you, please!
10
Let the courts decide the validity of the California laws.
All this talk of California breaking federal law and unconstitutional behavior is a legally unsupported smoke screen. The idea of sending local lawmakers to jail over laws prepared in good faith is the biggest joke of all time. Myriad defiant laws passed by states, mostly in the south, on abortion, and voting rights are declared unconstitutional every year and no one talks about sending Republican State lawmakers to jail. Let's see Donald Trump in jail for his myriad proven offenses first.
After the 2018 elections the smoke will be blowing the other direction.
13
One commenter compared our state with antebellum South Carolina. I take issue with that. Sir, we first of all have no intention of seceding from the Union. Quite the contrary. Secondly, unlike the era of Lincoln, a man of wisdom, dignity, and integrity, we are being victimized by an individual who is a bigot and racist, an amoral egomaniac named Trump. His mantra is "divide and conquer," much like his idol's in Russia.
Lastly, and most importantly, we embrace the immigrant. We want and intend to integrate never segregate. We are interdependent with our sisters and brothers from across the border or abroad. In the true sense of the word, we want a Union. Morality and fairness are on California's side.
12
But the law is not on your side. You don't get to have your own immigration policy. When California's ideas about illegal immigration conflict with United States' ideas about illegal immigration, California must lose.
Otherwise get ready for several other states to start seeking their own path on several other settled federal issues like abortion and gay marriage.
US federal law is supreme over state laws when there is a conflict.
21
This seems to be what moral philosophers call a "dirty hands" situation: there are moral imperatives and costs on both sides. Those who cite law in this case are correct: states are subject to federal law, and there are good reasons for that. Those who cite protection of the underrepresented and disempowered are also correct: in the face of injustice, attempting to preserve human integrity is paramount.
In other words, California should fight. Maybe they'll lose, and maybe they should lose. But they should fight anyway.
1
I will take Federal law over states rights anyday.
10
Ok, but I read the article looking for some specific instance of California law contradicting federal law. I didn't find one. Several laws cited govern how and whether state officials may or may not cooperate with federal officials. It seems to me California may legally decide the extent to which it will aid federal officers in their duties. The federal government cannot conscript them.
Brown is right to call this political theater. The legal theory may be flimsy, but the suit serves Trump's and Sessions's political purposes. Sessions can do something Trump wants, always a good thing where he's concerned. Trump gets to make more immigration noise, uphold a campaign promise, and turn the conversation away from the Russia investigation.
8
Too bad California can't get Federal taxes directly from California to hold in escrow for the the trump-Feds - to keep them honest! Indeed, Californians are being taxed without representation and having their hard earned tax money already paid to the trump-Fed withheld from their state without representation.
6
“We have a lot of bad leaders around the world that operate in ways we would never tolerate in the United States.”
- Jeff Sessions, March 1, 2017
You’re about to find out just how true that statement was, Mr Sessions.
13
I would go a step further and eject all ICE agents from California. Bring on the Balkinization, I'm sick of my tax dollars supporting this heinous behavior. I want to live in a place that treats people with dignity, this Government has none.
6
If that were to happen you might come to regret it. It takes, for example, just one hit and run by an unlicensed, uninsured illegal immigrant driver to make a huge difference in your life and their 'dignity' might not be worthy of your injury.
6
Rather then attacking California, Mr. Sessions should be trying to emulate a state that actually sends more money to Washington then it receives, unlike Alabama. Perhaps there is a cause and effect, states that are open to immigration and support education, are progressive in a word, generate the wealth to fund the rest of the country. Unfortunately most of the current leaders of Congress are from recipient states of this great wealth transfer.
10
This was a great strategy. Despite what many believe there is no consensus on immigration in this country. It is my belief that a majority if citizens, the people who actually count, think we have accepted too many people.
By calling out California Trump is going to get the people of California, who have misgivings about the tens of millions here illegally, a chance to start speaking out. And they will.
Those who keep pushing for large scale amnesties are going to ensure Republicans maintain control in the House. Those that keep pushing for the total abandonment of the rule of law, in favor of a feelings based system, are harming some of the best things about this country.
Look at California to see the wonders of illegal immigration. Collapsed public systems. Poverty. Violence. Housing shortages. Water shortages. Increased competition resulting in increased prices. Crowded cities. A large economy with a massive base of poverty- fake prosperity based on the principle that more people equals more stuff which equals wealth.
Most Americans would not choose to live in a third-world country- why on Earth are why importing the third-world and setting it up in our borders?
23
That’s a very Trumpian statement blaming all of California’s problems on immigration. But you forgot earthquakes and drought because Mother Nature must be a right-wing Republican as well. The fact is California’s economy has been reliant on immigrant labor for a long long time. Without it, California agriculture loses bigly. Plus Californians know that immigrants are not a criminal class. They know immigrants to be hard working future Americans. I lived in LA from 2009-2016 so I know from where I speak. One other thing: there really are not a lot of single-issue voters when it comes to immigration. But there are millions of single-issue voters energized to vote against Trump: the 35% man. So I think you better prepare for a wave - no I take it back - a tsunami election this November.
4
Well, it's true that if everyone left California, there would be no water shortage and no housing shortage. So tell us, please, what's the right number of Californians, and how to decide?
No small number of Californians were born in other states. They came for economic opportunity and famously good weather, or to be a star in Hollywood. Do you think they use water and live in houses? Would you send them home, too?
Some of the problems you exaggerate. Others are the product of poor public policy choices. None of them are the result of too many people. Choosing to blame immigrants is choosing not to understand that.
1
Gee, I wonder why citizens of third world countries want to come here? Opportunity? Maybe. Hard to believe, huh?
1
It must frustrate Trump that those of us on the West Coast just don't consider him very important or relevant when it comes to justice, freedom, and civil rights. The West Coast- aka the Left Coast - is about the only place left in America that is actually America.
8
From where I sit California looks less like America and more like Mexico.
14
I will say that unless we want to get stuck with Trump again for another 4 years - that is assuming that Republicans won't do their job of removing him if Mueller's investigation warrants it - we should tread a little lighter with sanctuary status in certain conditions. It's not just Trump's true base that wants the reigns pulled in a bit on immigration but many Dems and Independents.
I would make darn sure that the people who we are trying to protect, and keep with their families and such definitely do not have serious criminal histories. If even one or two cases of these are found to be true, Trump will create an entire agency named after that criminal's victim and rally further people. He's an expert at that sideshow.
Because I have a strong feeling that with Trump at the helm the economy probably won't hold up very long, it will be partly/mostly blamed on immigrants by Trump and of course he'll use that to stay in power.
He was given a great economy by Obama and now look, we have the market starting into wild mood swings, tariffs based trade wars in the offing, a major flexing China behemoth and a fraying EU. He will continue to do what every authoritarian has done and blame the "outsiders".
We need to be careful that our policies actually help the right people and not enable Trump.
50
Federal Government statistics prove the the illegal immigrant community has lower crime rates than the general American citizen population. California is not taking the stand that illegal immigrants that commit violent crimes should not be deported.
2
So Jeff, nothing in my comment points to anything different than what you proposed. But I also know how us serious progressives can be and we can lump all people into categories just as the right likes to do.
All I'm saying is for us to make sure our house is in order, well, first.
1
The economy has turned around after 8 years of stagnation. But your hope is it tanks? Nice , way to be positive and not acknowledge the truth.
The Justice Department the opening round in its battle against sanctuary laws earlier this month when the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California declined a request from California Attorney General Xavier Becerra to block the Trump administration’s decision to withhold a law enforcement grant to the state as part of its crackdown on states and jurisdictions that protect illegal immigrants. The United States can apply the grant money to a crackdown on California businesses that employ undocumented immigrants.
5
Exactly. Where are all you tRump supporters about the big agriculture corporations in California who EMPLOY those immigrants? You sure don't seem eager for Sessions to start hauling farm managers into prison for giving shelter to 'illegals', hmmmm?
Don't you think that Texas businesses should also come under this 'heavy hand of gov't regulation'? Lots of illegal immigrants in Arizona too.... But you complain only about a blue state.
Hypocrisy, thy name is tRump supporter!
I am not a Trump supporter.. But I do think employers, including farmers, should comply with laws that prohibit hiring illegal immigrants. I live in Texas and think Texas employers should also comply with the law.
3
Illegal aliens in the country are no more "undocumented immigrants" than prison escapees are "undocumented parolees". Lets be real.
34
I think we need a national immigration policy, and a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants plus better border enforcement. But... the issue here is whether states can essentially ignore the federal government. This is a path to anarchy, and as a Californian, I think it is dangerous for California to so blatantly flaunt the authority of the federal government. I hope the Trump administration wins. If we don't like the policies in Washington, then we need to WIN THE ELECTIONS at the federal level. That's how democracies are supposed to work. We need democracy and not anarchy.
23
It’s not anarchy! CA is operating under its duly passed laws.
5
No one is ignoring the federal government, and California politicians did, last I looked, win elections.
What the federal government cannot do is dragoon California employees to enforce federal law.
If California law contradicted federal law, as the suit alleges, that would be a problem. But that's not the case. California simply takes the position that immigration is a federal matter. California employees are not hired or required to do federal bidding, especially when to do so would contradict their duty to Californians.
This situation is very different from the civil rights era, when state-enforced segregation — in bus terminals, say — directly contradicted federal law. If one law says I can sit here, and another says I cannot, which one should I obey?
California officials face no such conundrum. Let us hope the courts will see the distinction, even if Sessions cannot.
2
We are not a democracy. We're a republic. If we were a democracy, the president would most likely be somebody else.
1
This is a relatively small skirmish in the struggle to regain America's democratic values. As the FBI is focusing its attention on on the Russian cyber-invasion of our country, Mr. Trump and Mr. Sessions would be advised to do the same. Picking on blue states will not make us forget that Sessions wants to hide his meetings with the Russians. It will not make the Trump presidency appear to be legitimate, either. It's not justice they're after--it's just another fistful in the food fight.
6
Trump won because a large number of citizens have concerns about illegal immigration.
It is why the Republican party will maintain control of the House.
And it will be why our politics will continue to radicalize.
In the last presidential election approximately 129 million people voted. The pro-illegal immigration groups want to legalize, and grant citizenship to, several million Dreamers. Then they want to extend that benefit to the parents who put their kids at risk- another 3 to 4 million.
Then the other 20 million here illegally get to stay and vote. Then every person they know gets to come too. Cousins, second cousins, great uncles twice removed. Grandmas sisters daughters cousin.
The pro-illegal immigrant groups want to fundamentally change the electorate. This is about taking power from existing citizens and giving it to preferred groups in order for certain groups of people to get more power.
When 129 million people vote and you do not get the result you want you could try to convince some of those people that you have policies they could support. Or- you could just create tens of millions of new citizens- disenfranchising citizens that do not matter because they might be Republicans.
If my choices are support Trump or support open borders with endless amnesties and the passing out of citizenship as if it were nothing then I pick Trump.
96
Trump “won” the Electoral College (not the popular vote!) because many conspired to defraud the US. Mueller has already indicted 13 and is obviously working to indict more using this same law:
https://lawfareblog.com/about-russia-indictment-robert-muellers-legal-th...
6
I despise trump and his minions and literally everything he has done, but i do support this one aspect of his platform. We cannot just let everyone in. End of story. And the mayor in oakland should be charged with a crime.
12
The democrats continue to play to trumps one issue that Americans are concerned about, the flooding of the country with immigrants, legal or otherwise.
5
It cannot stand that States can act as their own dominions ignoring federal laws that they are compelled to comply with.
Does anyone remember the Civil War?
50
What happens when the Federal Government is treating people who come from somewhere else (like African slaves), subject to inhumane treatment, indifference to healthy family cohesion, and indifference to the enormous contribution these "others" are making to the American economy, American science, American medicine (we have a shortage of Dr.'s, and you will often find children of immigrants serving rural areas an small towns and cities, where there is no other medical care) and excelling in every field in which America considers itself "great." Get rid of trade, get rid of "others", give the lions share of money to those who have too much, and hide it. Great for America! It's sickening.
1
But the Feds have to enforce the federal laws. As they did when schools were desegregated.
CA is not preventing the Feds from enforcing federal law.
And CA municipalities and public safety officers are rightly following CA laws.
2
There is no federal law requiring the states to enforce federal immigration law. Just as there is no federal law requiring the states to enforce federal marijuana laws, or federal firearms laws. It is well-settled that state law enforcement may not be compelled to enforce federal statutes. What the states may not do is violate federal civil rights, and no one has a "right" to be deported. This lawsuit is, in fact, a political "stunt".
43
Lawyers will make out just fine under tRump. It seems that he sues at the drop of a hat (the Roy Cohn method) and he is being sued by his victims. Making lawyers richer while pilfering the pockets of the taxpayer.
4
If states can violate federal laws, why can't conservative states outlaw abortion? Liberals want their way or the highway. That is not how it works.
22
Thank god for California. As the paragon, welfare, Tower of Babel, state of the future it is leading the way to the 3rd world u.s. that all open borders, come one, come all, lefties envision for the rest of the country. As we all know, any laws restricting immigration are xenophobic and racist by definition. Forward California, to a future of pollution, crowding, poverty and unsustainability.
12
Mexico will NEVER pay for the wall.
But they might happily contribute to a California legal battle!
3
ICE can have Deven Nunes.
6
It’s about time !
10
The case is pretty clear: "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."
Eventually, the courts will rule that these state laws are unconstitutional.
16
Trump and Sessions will be out of power long before that...
3
In Printz v. United States (1997), the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government could not require states to conduct background checks on individuals purchasing guns because it violated the Tenth Amendment by commanding state officials directly. The Justice Department maintains that the Tenth Amendment’s Supremacy Clause does not apply in the current case because the California sanctuary laws are designed to obstruct federal officials from enforcing immigration laws. One prohibits private employers from voluntarily cooperating with immigration officials. Another prevents state and local law enforcement officers from transferring illegal immigrants held in their custody to the custody of federal immigration officials. The federal government isn’t commanding California to enforce immigration laws; it is asking California to stop shielding those who violate U.S. immigration laws.
12
Then let the courts decide. Threatening arrest is a practice of autocratic (communist and fascist) regimes, no democracies.
3
Good succint analysis of the distinction between the Supremacy Clause (Article VI) and the Tenth Amendment, as interpreted in the Printz case, as applicable now in the case involving California's "sanctuary" laws.
2
There is a lawful method for entering this country, My daughter-in-law followed this procedure, which included investigations, hiring an attorney, etc. and after five years and passing the exam, she became a citizen. I don't understand why everyone should not follow the law? Does the law apply to everyone or just not to people in some cities in some states?
26
Exactly why is it that other states pass restrictive voting laws,defund medical care, refuse to support public education, but the full force of the Justice Department focuses its attention on immigration in California?The ninth district court in San Francisco has prevailed on immigration law.Sessions has many more challenges than to stake his power on this fight.
14
Because mass unfettered illegal immigration has burdened and undermined all those other issues we care about. We have schools with trailers where there was once a playground because of the influx of undocumented students. Rising taxes, rising healthcare costs while our emergency rooms and doc in the box are filled with people simply not paying. Let alone what selective law enforcement of tax laws, employment laws, work rules, insurance on and on does to degrade citizenship.
A country cannot function for the good of its people on any level if we have an entire class exempt from laws and collective responsibilities.
19
Neither public education nor medical care is a right guaranteed by the federal government. The federal government can choose to spend federal tax dollars to support one, or the other, or both, but the federal government has no obligation to fund either one of them. Whether a state has such an obligation is determined by the constitution and laws of each state. I say that even though, in general, I support at least a reasonable level (yes, I know, that's where the debate arises) of public education and at least some safety net level of medicare.
2
You would think Mr. Trump, the King of non-disclosure agreements, would have a little more respect for what California is doing in regards to undocumented immigrants. Sure, with a court order or subpoena, they'll cooperate, but without one, why should they voluntarily hurt the state's tax base and peaceful social order?
3
This should be interesting, for the entire time that this country has existed there has always been a clash of federal vs state laws and since there are multiple states following in California's foot steps this case or cases will undoubtedly end up in the Supreme Court where it should go Trump's way if he's still in office.
2
If trump/sessions thinks that with holding some federal funds from California regarding immigration issues will actually change anything in that state, guess what, they will do just fine with out it.
5
The obvious analogy is to marijuana laws. Asylum and marijuana sales violate federal law, but there is a tradition of giving state laws a pass, despite the fact that the state laws can’t stand up in court. The attack on California immigration law will probably be successful. But it violates a long tradition. California has gone its own way, however illegal. If it loses in court, there is no assurance that it will abide by the court decision. Sessions is risking a constitutional crisis. His action is legal but it risks the sort of state defiance not seen since segregation. In my opinion, it just isn’t worth it. Who wants to go to war over immigration?
7
This is a tough question. I sincerely think that States should have the right to create their own laws but what happens when those laws technically violate Federal laws? Some will argue that we already fought a Civil War over State's rights and the States lost. Before 1865 it was 'these' United States. After 1865 it became 'the' United States. I do think it's wrong for States like California to flout Federal immigration law. Yet I agree with States that have legalized marijuana against Federal law. I realize you can't have it both ways so what to do about it? Guess we'll see with the results of this lawsuit.
27
"but what happens when those laws technically violate Federal laws?"
The Constitution has an answer for that and it's called The Supremacy Clause.
1
The feds could seek to enforce federal laws over marijuana. What they cannot do is demand that states assist in enforcement.
2
My son lives in CA and has been suggesting I move there too.
Up till now I’ve been fearful of earthquakes. But I’m beginning to think that Mother Nature is more caring to her children than Papa Doc in the White House is to our citizens.
CA - a State that cares about people. Papa Doc, a resident that cares only for himself.
8
Once again Trump and his minions (although who knows how long Sessions will wear that moniker) are attacking anything and everything (except Putin and Russia, hmmmm) to distract from Mr. Mueller's investigation. Despite solid evidence that Russia attacked the United States election, arguably the foundation of our country, Don Don decides to sue California rather than say ANYTHING AT ALL about the evidence of the Russian attack. All he can do is say "You haven't caught me yet; let me throw some more chaff at you and see how long and far you follow it."
I am reminded of a quote from Joe Louis about an opponent: "He can run, but he can't hide."
5
Federal law is supreme, and immigration is squarely in the jurisdiction of the Federal government. Suppose a state decided that Federal civil rights laws did not apply to it, and therefore it routinely looked the other way on both de facto and de jure discrimination. Maybe Mississippi can follow California's lead, and only cooperate with the Federal government where it wanted to, and sought to frustrate enforcement of Federal law where it disagreed.
13
Federal law is supreme only if the Supreme Court deems it constitutional and this case will end up in the Supreme Court.
1
Under Trump ICE agents have violated human rights, separated young children from their parents, denied people access to legal representation, and endangered public safety and human lives with courthouse arrests.
"ICE" now stands for "Incredibly Cruel Enforcers."
The majority of Trump's Cabinet is less "law abiding" than the vast majority of these "illegal" immigrants.
6
If I were to try to take up residence in France as an illegal immigrant and was picked up and deported by their immigration authorities that would be expected by the people there. So what if I am cruelly deprived of a view of the Eiffel tower?
Please get over the idea that there is any valid entitlement to evade immigration law - there isn't.
8
Democrats have staked out an untenable, losing position.
On the one hand, they dislike our immigration laws and insist that those laws should be ignored.
On the other hand, as much as they whine about DACA, etc., they are nowhere to be found when it comes to discussing changing our immigrations laws so that they are actually laws we can all live with and see enforced.
Refusing to change laws you don’t like in favor of lawlessness will not win the American people.
20
Having just read an old text on the Civil War and the horrendous Reconstruction saga, I do wonder if California can withstand this lawsuit. It is one thing for individual citizens to attempt a safe haven for immigrants and willingly accept the legal risks, it is another thing for elected officials to flout Federal Law and the Constitution which provides the Federal Government with the powers involving immigration laws. The Southern States beginning with South Carolina had to learn the hard way that the Federal Government is not to be flouted except in Constitutional pathways.
Having said that I hope Congress provides a pathway for Dreamers to stay here permenately.
7
California is using its legislative process, per the Constitution of that state. If the laws are found to be contrary to the Constitution of the United States, then that legislation is nullified. However, to threaten arrest of those who disagree politically and attempt to use legal process to exercise their rights as citizens, is unconscionable AND unconstitutional. There is a system for this. It is not part of our democratic process or Constitution for one political party and its leader to call for the arrests of their opponents.
3
Are you telling the world that California officials are not smart enough to understand before hand that what they are doing is improper from the get go when the Constitution isclear on the subject of the location of authority in these matters
2
Conservatives are perpetrating the biggest hoax ever attempted on the American public by claiming so-called “chain migration” is some new liberal invention. Sponsoring family members to a world of freedom is as old as this country.
I spend a lot of time doing genealogy and have discovered many interesting things. But the most stunning has been the naturalization papers of immigrants over the past 150 years, which show time and again relatives sponsoring other relatives to our great land of freedom.
It’s “fake news” to throw Trump’s iconic phrase back at him, that this is new. The United States is a sanctuary for those oppressed.
Conservatives want to keep this country to themselves now that they are here. It doesn’t work that way. Or if it does, send Melanie’s family back.
5
There's nothing wrong with immigration when done legally. The very first thing undocumented immigrants do when they enter this country is break the law. I've grown up with many immigrants who came to this country years ago to make a better life for themselves and their families. They did it the proper way and became legal citizens, it angers these people also that they had to go through the entire process and these illegals are having everything handed to them. The only thing this teaches our children today is that social and political disobedience gets them what they want. Everyone is on the I hate Trump bandwagon which quite obviously isn't working. Maybe if everyone tried working together we could find a solution that makes the majority happy. Trump is just like a little rich kid who is used to getting their way, the more you tell him no the harder he will fight back.
9
Whatever happened to the Republicans being the party of "State's Rights?"
2
Jeff Sessions is suffering from a broken heart and public humiliation. The man he loved and supported has scorned him.
Suing California is Jeff's way of asking his hero to "please, please take me back, Donald."
6
Look and read through this article carefully. It is not-to-subtley leaning against our current administrations policies. When the article deceptively labels illegal immigrants as "immigrants" and states that the federal government is against California for their protection of "undocumented" or "unauthorized" immigrants. A crime is a crime no matter what the media bias says it is. The federal government, no matter what political party is in power, has full authority for policies concerning immigration as stated in our constitution. They also have the authority and responsibility to enforce those policies. If those policies do not meet the majority of our populations agreement, then the Ammendment should be changed. Of which there is a legal and correct process to do. Otherwise......follow the law!!!!
13
“A crime is a crime no matter what the media bias says it is.”
“...follow the law!!!!”
Just one question for you, Mike: When the Mueller investigation is over, and the chickens come home to roost, will you apply these same standards to those who are deemed to have broken the law? Trump for instance?
2
One side effect of high immigration levels is a right wing government, here and in Europe.
12
The magnificent Jerry Brown and his colleagues are truly protecting this nation from the tyranny of this cruel and corrupt Administration. Every decent American will be rooting for their success in court. We Shall Overcome!
6
"Thomas D. Homan, the acting director of United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said that the state should expect to see “a lot more deportation officers” and that elected officials who support the policy should be arrested."
More evidence of this country's surreal descent into fascism. Did any of these people in public office read the Constitution?
1
It amazes me how many poorly informed these comments are. Every single one of the illegal immigrants targeted by ICE in Oakland was a criminal. Not dreamers, not hard workers, not great neighbors. President Obama had the same exact policy, target illegal immigrants who commit crimes. But, of course we hate Trump, so the same policy is causing outrage. Looney Libby Schaaf is on the clock, it is inevitable that in the very near future one of the criminals who she tipped off and avoided arrest will kill or maim someone - what will she say? Maybe Jerry Brown should focus on getting the thousands of homeless men off the streets of cities that were once beautiful. San Francisco smells like the city by the bathroom, not the city by the bay.
27
Hopefully Cali Colorado and all the other states that had democratic votes and decided to ease the laws around Cannabis go together and sues Trump, his representatives and all the other federals trying to once again escalate the war on drugs, for not acknowledging democracy, the voters and the state laws as a retaliation.
That way the Trump administration would lose not one court battle on Californian immigration laws, but also another where the Trump administration have gone all dumb and dumber as well.
1
The sanctuary that California has set up hurts the our citizens that are poor. Don’t the democrats know that? Our poor have to compete for jobs with illegal immigrants who work for less then the prevailing wage. Maybe that is what the democrats want. That want us to be poor. The poor is their voting base.
I don’t want to hear that the illegals take the jobs that nobody wants to do. Nobody wants to do the job at the wage offered except the illegals.If not for the illegals the wage would go up until the job gets filled. And yes the rich Californians will have to pay more to have their lawn mowed.
16
"Justice Department asked 23 jurisdictions across the country this year to provide documentation that they had not kept information from federal immigration authorities."
uh, Ima gonna need some paperwork to show that we have all the paperwork
So localities that vote to live under welcoming immigration rules will have their chosen leaders arrested. Would Trump and Sessions then have these political prisoners indoctrinated in bigotry before releasing them?
1
From Wikipedia - The oath of office for governor of California"
"I (Governor) do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California, that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about to enter."
...The chosen leaders obligate themselves to support and defend the constitution of the US as well as the state of CA. Up to the courts to decide which takes precedence
2
The commentators associated with this article are doing EXACTLY what trump wants. He throws hand grenades and we have knee jerk reactions. Here's my take:
1) Immigrants have always had to deal with haters in North America. They have for 300 years. 100 years ago, it was the Irish. Now it's brown people.
2) Politicians have always made brownie points slamming immigrants. Nothing new here.
3) California decided long ago that immigrants make up such a large presence due to agriculture that the economic engine -- basically driven by exploitation --- is crucial to overall success.
4) The Feds cannot deport illegals in the efficient manner they so desire without local help. Deportations under Obama were massive, lest we forget.
5) We hate trump and California businessmen will never set foot in a jail if they hire an illegal.
6) If these folks were from Norway, no issue.
7) Illegals don't shoot up schools with AR-15's nor to they commit crimes to a greater degree than whites.
Fine pickle. Has his base not yet learned that trump is a con man on all issues? Never buy a condo from this guy.
2
Mollycoddle Russia; attack California.
Clearly Sacremento has been a lot less forthcoming with the business loans than Moscow
5
Homan's comments are rich with irony; how many persons has he condemned to death by sending them back to hostile countries?
1
Nothing in California's laws stop federal agents from arresting, detaining, and deporting illegals. California just won't help them do it.
3
Perhaps the most incompetent skeleton crew ever assembled in the U.S. Justice Department is riding out west in search of the first big legal dragon.
Last time I looked, Los Angeles had the largest Spanish-speaking population in the Northern Hemisphere outside of Mexico City.
Will we soon smell Sessions tacos?
2
California needs a “wall”... no, not that little one, a taller & much longer one...
1
Criminals should be deported, but are illegal immigrants considered this automatically?
the docks of Sandusky Ohio during the underground railroad weren't a friendly place for slave catchers seem like Cali. is getting to be the same
No, Mr. Sessions, the policies of the Trump administration and your Justice Department imposed are unjust, unfair and unconstitutional and we the People of the State of California are going to fight them.
By the way, so much for your past claims about State rights. You, sir, are a Hypocrite.
4
I fully support this lawsuit against California for its active nonsupport of federal law.
California's actions remind me of 1861. Let the state secede from the Union.
6
Gladly
5
What is one to think when the Federal Government believes it can compel local and state police to do its bidding? We then have a nationalized police state with the power to enforce every whim of our proto-fascist president, our proto-fascist administration, our proto-fascist Congress and our proto-fascist Supreme Court.
Perhaps the Feds might try talking with California. Or has the U.S. splintered so badly dialogue amongst our own citizens is no longer an option? If so, Russia is succeeding far beyond its wildest dreams.
4
Classic Trump. Say one thing and then do the exact opposite. He said over and over again that he would only deport the criminal illegal immigrants like the gang members of MS13. Yet ICE is rounding up law abiding people, tearing apart families, and arresting 7/11 workers. Yup, I really feel better knowing that my slushy server is no longer a danger to my community. ICE now looks menacingly like jack-booted thugs of a dystopian state. Again, classic Trump.
3
Don't mess with California--you'll get nowhere.
4
ICE Director Homans believes he's the new J Edgar Hoover. His threats against legislators, mayors, and governors are unethical and probably illegal. But he doesn't care. He's got Trump ready to pardon him.
Oakland's Mayor Schaaf is a hero, for warning of coming ICE operations. These vans cruise streets, and stop in front of residents who look Latino. Officers sit behind darkened glass, like they're playing storm troopers. Children are terrified. It's sick.
You'd better believe there's anger brewing. Take a poor community where people work hard, frighten them constantly, rip apart families. Let these ICE guys walk around like they own the place. They're like gasoline on tinder. Maybe Homans wants that, because if people attack ICE, he'll say that shows they're criminal.
California is right to deny ICE it's invasion. It's a catastrophe. You can't push people's buttons all the time, without turn some on red alert. Like a lot of American police, ICE is made up of recruits without much real-life experience. They can pump iron to look tough, but put them in harm's way and they'll over-react.
Like so much about this administration, this ICE strategy is stupid.
3
Illegal immigrants are not refugees.
Registered DACA people yes keep them in a road to citizenship. On the other hand the idea that if your illegal and you made it here means you win a path to citizenship is nuts.
10
You’ve interviewed them all, have you?
Hypocritical that the very same administration that has defended and supported sex abusers, is harboring brand promoters and presidential favor-invoking loan applications from the White House wants to challenge a State's rights.
While every conceivable moral , ethical and frequently illegal activity is flouted by this administration it deigns to impugn a State sovereignty.
If these Syndicate and family members weren't so full of malignancy and hubris they would almost be laughable.
Get out and vote ! Unseat the enablers and sycophants of these felons.
3
This Californian is proud of his state leaders standing up to Washington isolationists. Immigrant crimes pale in comparison to those committed by US citizens. Now would be a good time to secede.
4
Mere laws are irrelevant in California. Here in San Francisco, we celebrate and protect illegal aliens who murder young women like Kate Steinle. We encourage the epidemic of car break-ins, the source of the stolen pistol with which he killed Kate, as it would be xenophobic to actually arrest or discourage street criminals. We just appropriated another billion tax dollars to provide medical care for illegal aliens.
We plan to become Mexico's northernmost state, supported by the taxes of legitimate US citizens, of course. Why would anyone think that a mere lawsuit by the mere US government might make an impression on Mexico del Norte?
17
I left California precisely because of its open door policy for illegals and because of high taxes and severe over crowding. We love Florida and America.
15
I commend Governor Brown and the majority of the people of California who are trying to stop the Gestapo like tactics of ICE ad directed by Sessions. America was populated by immigrants and the ones the "Trumpists" seek to expel today have taken the jobs that Anglo and Black Americans won't.
We may see food prices skyrocket due to the fact that are not enough workers in California and other warm weather states to pick the crops that wil rot in the field. This suit is nothing but an attempt to incarcerate people who have come here for a better life and who contribute to our society. Contrary to the racist and bigoted rantings from Trump on down to despicable current and former law enforcement officers like Joe Arpaio, these "illegals' have a lower crime and abuse rate that the rest of Americans.
2
Time to deport all the lawyers! It seems the major industry in the USA is now filing lawsuits.
2
Funny about the GOP when it last nominated a madman to run the nation - Barry Goldwater, who was willing to violate any law to keep the US from being attacked by “Reds”,
California elected Sen. George Murphy - who, according to Tom Lerher* believed in BOTH Goldwater’s extremism “imagine ... Melodies of 1984”.
Also believed in the nation’s NEED for illegal alien farmworkers, the satirist adding “After all even in Egypt the Pharaohs/Had to import Hebrew braceros.”
And remember, these days you don’t get up and leave your home because here “the streets are paved with gold”.
We’re at Obama’s Great Recovery full employment - and lots of US companies have moved all but non-‘net sales operations to Mexico and elsewhere. A rep from Fredrich, which still builds its top line (only) air conditioners in the US told me a few years ago “we used to proudly say we’re the only company still using compressors made in the USA. Now we brag we’re the only company using compressors made in North America.
People come here to avoid death, mutilation, rape, and other crimes against humanity - against war and violence endemic against them at home - and, if course, the old seasonal farmworkers who ho home after harvest the reason for the California law’s broad support.
*Tom Lerher’s album “That Was the Year that Was” written for NBC’s mid-60s news satire “That was The Week That Was”, aka TW3.
1
The issue at hand is whether the law is Constitution and this rumpus will end in the Supreme Court. Trump is a populist as was Hitler and Mussolini. Can you imagine where all this is going to end up? The knock on the door, people being dragged off to some camp, families sheltering families from the goon squads hunting them down. Is this Mr. Sessions' answer to Trump's very public disappointment in his Attorney General, because it all leaves a very nasty taste in the mouth?
4
The term criminal here is usually a racial dog whistle that really means an immigrant likely one who speaks English as a second language and perhaps isn't as pale skinned as the ones doing the arresting and deporting.
Now if we could only deport the elected and unelected criminals who violate Americans and foreigners civil and human rights routinely to some remote island so they can all play oppressor to other fellow oppressors that would solve a lot of problems. They can take their guns and nukes with them.
6
So very proud of California. This D.C. administration cares not one bit @ illegal immigration. What they do care @ is fracturing every single block of citizenry, dividing us until we all hate each other. And we’re reporting our parents to the authorities. Grotesque. Despicable. But not to worry, the idiot president has already moved on to something else to wreck. And Preet Bahara (who is speaking tonight at Elmhurst College, Elmhurst, Illinois) for President 2020!
8
So if the Trump can't win a state at the ballot box, he will constantly attack it far worse than he will ever punish Russia for helping him. Raise taxes on CA and NY and NJ. Attack their equality laws, attack their public projects for infrastructure, attack their healthcare.
It will be a cold day in hell before blue states ever support a fascist bigot like Trump who betrayed this country's democratic process. Attacking the state that has the strongest economy, contributes the most to technological advances, and pays far more in taxes already than red states is basically trying to destroy the US from inside. Trump's neoconfederacy lurches ahead.
11
I almost feel sorry for Jeff Sessions; continuing to debase himself in hopes of getting under the good graces of his master. It's all for naught. Going after California will not make Donald Trump like you any more. As soon as Mueller doesn't indict Hillary or Barack- for something, Jeff Sessions will be "A Disgrace"- again.
8
The California economy is structured upon immigrant labour. Immigrants bring their luggage, and also their baggage; like it or not. President Frump, please help provide us with a solution to our own problems, with which we must deal with on a daily basis. Tossing a spanner into the works is not wise, useful, or justifiable.
Hubris. Carping hubris.
3
This is perfect. As a Trump voter I was starting to get worried that with DACA disappearing until the Supreme Court rules on it, that the issue of illegal immigration would go away until after the midterms.
But Trump just resurrected it. And while the Dreamers are sympathetic in theory, a bunch of limousine liberals who want cheap nannies and landscapers certainly aren’t. Especially when they thumb their nose at our immigration laws. On Sunday, anyone who wanted to tap into the “wisdom” of the Hollywood deplorables was free to. And yet the Oscars had their smallest audience, ever. The best part is, they’re too thick and oblivious to realize just how unpopular they are.
So this is basically a twofer. We’ll get to see CA lose in court, and we’ll get to see the GOP ride this issue to a good midterm showing. Consider the polling - for the past two months the Dems’ generic ballot advantage declined to the single digits. What was going on? The DACA debate and the Schumer shut down.
Given that the Dreamers are off the table, and the most obnoxious and out of touch among the left are now on the menu, I’d say Open Borders Round 2 is going to go even better for us. Trump won on this issue and Dem lawlessness in 2016. He’s wise to go back to it.
If the Italians of all people can sustain a fight for sovereignty and borders against a bunch of corrupt and out of touch elites, than so can we.
20
If Americans really knew their history they would know it was democrats who historically championed states rights to protect their local racist policies. It became a republican mantra when many white supremacist democrats flocked to the republican party. That intensified when Truman, a democrat and son of klan members, desegregated the military.
Illegal immigration is really hurting poor, black and working class communities and democrats are on the wrong side of this issue. Or is it that the democratic party is returning to their roots of class and racial bias. Claiming that curtailing illegal immigration is racist is disingenuous. Even the 2010 census showed that within one generation most immigrants identify as white, hence the white population grew. In NJ a study was published by the Star Ledger in which companies openly stated they even hire illegal immigrants over black Americans and other citizens.
Yet democrats wonder why they have lost working class white people and are losing black votes. At this point I guess democrats have to double down on trying to get amnesty and those illegal votes. In the meantime if certain demographics see their economic situation grow because of Trump policies such as this, then democrats will lose even more American citizens of various backgrounds. Protecting the nannies, landscapers and illegal or visa workers of rich democrats is not a sound policy and is a stab in the back to once loyal democrats.
18
I want to move to California. The state is standing on principles.
8
Stay in Florida and help vote out the Republicans there, in the Senate, and the Electoral College!
1
Boy are we working on that! Our congressional representative is independently wealthy, so getting him out is a tough job.
1
The federal Government has already lost on this issue with the Supreme Court once. Printz v. United States (1997). The federal government cannot force local and state authorities to do federal activities if they choose not to. Immigration control is a federal activity.
8
This Californian supports a motion to dismiss on the grounds that the regime that purports here to sue is illegitimate and must first seek approval to file from its overlord: Vladimir Putin and an appropriation from the Duma.
6
The first thing I did was to look for a copy of the lawsuit, which is here - https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4403884/3-6-18-US-v-Californi... It accuses California of violating the Supremacy Clause and seeks to invalidate three statutes that supposedly “obstruct” or “discriminate against” federal immigration enforcement efforts. My first reaction was to laugh, but on closer reading it’s better-crafted than I thought - not as obviously crazy as other stuff coming out of the administration - though it also doesn’t sound like the “major sanctuary jurisdictions” announcement Sessions is set to make in Sacramento today. Does a state have the right to punish private entities that voluntarily provide information to the federal government? I don’t know. As one commenter noted, Trump likes to be at war with everyone. In this case, he started the war with his cruel immigration policies, but now he’s just fighting back.
4
I don't know if I'd rather that my home state (the economic driver and treasure of nature known as "California") be dismissed and ignored by this crazy unfit president of ours and his merry band of administrators, or attacked by them in public so we can expose him and them even more decisively as the low-level operators they are.
Either way, I thank God that Jerry Brown is my state's governor. A leader in the true sense of the word, and an intellect that towers over those of opponants like Jeff Sessions. Not to mention a sense of humor - that quoted statement of his says it all.
7
California’s undocumented workers are the result of its addiction to cheap labor. And while it's true that this large cohort of low paid manual workers means cheaper produce for consumers, it also penalizes low income citizens and legal immigrants to find employment that pays a living wage.
So you want a free market and lower prices? Then ban tenure at all California's universities. Open the floodgates to allow educated people from all over the world to start competing for all university teaching jobs on an annual basis. The increased competition will allow universities to pay lower wages and less benefits to its teachers. The savings can be passed on to provide lower tuition for students. Furthermore, it will give these liberal minded California teachers a taste of what their state's low income citizens and legal residents have been experiencing for decades.
15
When the universities in California brought in H1b visa workers to displace American IT workers did tuition drop? I'd say no. Why would the self-serving administration of any organization that prefers cheap foreign workers share the benefits?
1
Keep in mind if democrats have a majority in the house and senate with a Democratic president and then ban assault rifles some states may ignore thew ban, continue to manufacture and sell so called assault rifles. If your OK with CA not following the law, then you should be OK with other states that ignore law.
5
In the third paragraph you talk about the "Trump administration’s efforts to curb immigration" but that's not fair because they aren't trying to curb immigration - they're trying to curb ILLEGAL immigration and that's an important distinction. I'm not defending Trump or his policies, but if you're going to bias your article against him, at least be factual in doing so.
14
Conservatives love to claim "states rights" against the big, bad, over bearing, tell-you-what-to-do federal government. Unless its something they want, in which case they are all to happy to employ that self-same government as a weapon.
5
Who needs “illegal” immigration when there is an easy workaround using the sham Einstein visa system. How about it, Mr. Trump, let’s have a full investigation of your current wife’s immigration. Then let’s hear everything there is to hear about her family. Nothing to hide?
A good, healthy discussion on immigration should start at the very top - before anyone else’s life is ruined playing immigration roulette.
3
These laws are not protecting immigrants. They are establishing a hierarchy on deportations, one that was lost once in the Obama administration and gone nuts with the Trump administration. If a serious criminal charge, California must engage with ICE. If a minor charge, not endangering anyone, why bother? The police effort must be targeted and strategic. Not a witch hunt on immigrants.
4
I'm not sure I'm clear on who the "Immigrant Worker Protection Act" is protecting... undocumented immigrant workers, or the employers that hire them for slave wages?
8
Just analyze the first paragraph of this story:
"The Trump administration escalated what had been a war of words over California’s immigration agenda, filing a lawsuit late Tuesday that amounted to a pre-emptive strike against the liberal state’s so-called sanctuary laws."
The Trump administration is not escalating anything. All escalation of this issue started at the State level and ends there. There is clear Federal law in play. 8 U.S. Code 1324 - "Bringing in and harboring certain aliens" is in play in the State, especially since the Mayor of Oakland warned illegals recently of pending ICE raids...and "The Trump Administration" is escalating things? That's a twist if I have ever seen one.
Also, these aren't "So-Called" Sanctuary Laws....the ARE Sanctuary Laws.
Liberal politicians are playing with fire here in open defiance of law. You want to change immigration law? Be my guest. Until then, follow it or pay the criminal price.
11
I always found it odd that the US does not enforce immigration law . My Canadian girl was shocked at what she saw in America - she said in Canada they enforce their laws.
26
It is baffling to this reader that California voters at large are apparently not widely protesting the fact of their local politicians (whose salaries are paid by state taxpayers) dedicating time and financial resources (also from taxapyers) to a campaign to protect illegal aliens, when these politicians could be using their efforts and taxpayer funds to provide a better life for U.S. citizens resident in the state.
Is the employment of illegal aliens illegal in California? If so, then employers who take on these illegal aliens are not only violating the law, but they also are fostering the exploitation of slavery-like practices for the purposes of their own economic gains.
22
If California wins, then we will never have meaningful gun control; never be able to ban any weapon that a particular state will not.
'Sanctuary' could then be given in any state or municipality that viewed federal law against its values.
Is shielding criminal illegal aliens really worth setting a precedent that could render any federal law subject to state policies?
17
I don't think you understand the meaning of 'sanctuary' or any of these laws and what they do.
Already, states have most of the powers to make and enforce laws. The areas of federal law is highly restricted to interstate commerce, currency, international borders and making war. States and local governments can and do already have made their own laws about gun control.
For years Republicans demanded a 'states rights' form of governance. Now they want Washington to forcibly impose the White House's demands on a state?
When Sessions was Senator, his GOP believed no single national policy could accommodate "differing cultures" and conditions among States. Sessions and his GOP COngressional buddies held fast to a then Republican doctrine that most power belonged to the states, since it was states that came together to form the United States.
Sessions and the GOP have shown themselves to be supreme hypocrites.
8
Like tariffs, no one will “win” this issue.
3
Trump is not targeting immigrants who come to the US through the proper legal channels. Trump is targeting immigrants who are in the US illegally. There is no gray area.
24
"Trump is not targeting immigrants who come to the US through the proper legal channels."
That is a lie. There was just a week or two ago a story about how people with green cards can be held in prison indefinitely. There are many "conservative" commenters who see "illegal" as a necessary part of "immigrant" and react to any story of an immigrant by speaking of illegal immigration. My green card holding, grew up and and went to college here, son-in-law to be was detained for hours in the company of my daughter after returning from a trip abroad with her to meet his extended family prior to getting married.
And that doesn't count all those emboldened by Trump to do a little vigilante enforcement of their own.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/08/us/he-became-a-hate-crime-victim-she-...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/06/us/kansas-indian-immigrant-murder.html
It's about priorities. Everyone knows that there is not enough money in the Treasury to fund hiring immigration officers and judges to round up the 12 million or so illegal aliens most of whom have integrated into our society and economy. Sanctuary laws do not protect serious criminals. What we want is for ICE to concentrate on the removal of those serious criminals.
Congress could change the laws to make law-abiding productive citizens out of the vast majority of those who are out of status. Those changes are way overdue and would adjust to common sense and reality. Going after people who have not committed crimes is inhumane and irrational.
Bravo California and all other states that prioritize citizen safety over national origin and alienage! At least the states understand the Constitution and the limits of abusive and wrongly motivated federal authority.
6
@Charles-Except by definition these are not citizens. These are people who have either illegally crossed our national borders or overstated their expired visas.
9
I find it ironic: when Nevada attempted to enforce immigration laws, the Obama Administration jumped in--to argue that states cannot involve themselves in what is essentially constitutes federal jurisdiction.
But now that Trump is in office, Liberals want to turn their hats around backwards--and argue states rights.
Rabid Liberal support of open borders and focus on the rights illegal aliens will turn out to be a big loser in November. Even the majority of Latinos support the rule of law.
26
Sessions and Trump have threatened to pull federal grant money,Then Cali should stop paying the Fed.
99
Sure, stop filing your Form 1040’s and see where that gets you: the monster man will come and get you. That’s what happened to Al Capone.
4
And the Fed should remove the FBI, ICE, DEA and all military bases. California can protect its self.
6
I'm all for it!! Please, Please let California secede!
1
I guess this means that Sessions and Trump only support states' rights when those states support their narrow political agenda.
8
WS-
Not really. The removal mission has become much larger than it needed to be when previous R & D administrations failed to remove them early on. Immigration has never been without an individual state's prevue so why are some deciding to block what was legally reserved for handling to the federal government?
A pox on both Dems and Reps. Their mutual hypocrisy is galling.
California is pulling the same "defiance" that was exercised by southern states during the civil rights era - and some how this is now acceptable because its in support of Dems "noble" resistance to federal dictates. And Reps (aka former Dixiecrats) are now on the reverse side where they are supporting the federal government's powers over "states' rights" - and this is now acceptable because they are standing up for a Hamiltonian interpretation of the Constitution.
Just goes to show how divisive and poisoned our political discourse has become.
57
Is the issue that, California is pulling the same "defiance", or is the issue the forcing the jurisdiction and responsibility of the Federal government onto the states? If you don't pay your Federal taxes is it the IRS or your state tax agency or state and local police who come knocking at your door?
There is an important difference. The southern states were themselves violating the 14th and 15th Amendments. States are expressly subject to those provisions. They are not subject to the immigration laws.
1
As a Californian that once lived in the south many years and that disagrees with most of Trump's agenda I must say your comment struck a chord. The southern resistance was also considered a noble cause by those in favor of it. You are right to point out this hypocrisy and I appreciate you helping me to see this a little better.
1
It will be fascinating to see how this plays out, as it goes to the heart of the old tension between Federal and State power. It is a struggle as old as the nation itself. And so too is the flow of people into the US from all corners of the world, hoping for a better life.
6
I'm hoping for a better life too but I don't get to just ignore laws I find inconvenient to my own self gain without any expecting legal repercussions.
5
Are you referring to Trump or those who immigrated without papers?
Is one really any better than the other? Should ever allow selective law enforcement based on political advantage?
1
All of this anti-immigration action by Trump/Sessions pretty much guarantees that the Republicans will not get any Hispanic votes in the coming decade or two, particularly among the young and aspiring generations.
6
Don't underestimate the power of the "single issue" voter when that single issue is abortion. NPR had a great segment before the 2016 election where they interviewed many, many Latinos that were voting for Trump because of that one issue. One woman even worked helping undocumented immigrants but was still voting for Trump because of his stance on abortion.
5
How insulting and demeaning that you believe all Hispanics are motivated by lawless opportunism. 'Aspiring' is now every man for himself regardless of the effect on the general welfare? Ignore whatever laws you want as long as you profit? What a great country we will have in the future. /s
6
My fellow liberals, please observe what the U.S. Constitution, Article VI says: "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."
We have relied on the supremacy clause for the past hundred years to support civil rights among other noble causes. But while "sanctuary cities" are good for the heart they are bad law and set a terrible example. Just as we should have seen a Trump coming and undoing by executive order what Obama did by executive order, so be aware that the bad guys will use "sanctuary cities" as a model for the next time they seek to limit civil rights. Let's obey the law for now, and change it by lawful means.
13
The Constitution is very specific about which areas the Federal government can make laws such as interstate commerce, currency, borders, treaties and making war and peace. All the other laws are left to the states to make and enforce. Both Congress and the Chief Executive have lost court battles when they violated the boundaries on their powers. So have the States.
The Sanctuary City and State laws have been carefully crafted to comply with the Constitution. They do not protect criminals. They do recognize the right to due process and other civil rights that are guaranteed to all who are within its borders whether they are citizens or not.
If we make sanctuary cities "okay" on this issue, you can bet TX, MI, AL, both Carolinas, LOU and GA will retaliate by making Houston, Dallas, Jackson, Montgomery, Birmingham, Charlotte, Charleston, New Orleans and Atlanta anti-LGBT sanctuary cities to protect their own "pet constituencies". Atlanta, the most progressive of the group, will be last to fall but with outside-the-perimeter lobbying, it WILL fall.
Conservatives outnumber us in this sad country. We're not thinking. If we ignore federal law, the Cons will swiftly serve us back a heaping bowl full of our own medicine, with a spoon of spite. Many people will suffer. Are we really sure we want to risk that to continue an addiction to the drug of cheap labor?
I am a Democrat but I agree with the poster who observed continued subversion of immigration law appears to benefit only one culture and none of the other ones, and actually lessens diversity. This is truthful. Spanish as the sole language is not diversity. It is apartheid under a different name. The wealthy just don't see it yet. California's homeless, unemployed native-born youth, the poor, and every black Californian have. They've struggled and died jobless under Spanish neo-apartheid for nearly three decades. Let's see fairness and some compassion for those marginalized groups as well.
10000 pebbles in a bowl designed for 2000 does not work. Take a drive midday on the 405 and see what this means.
In reference to the 2012 SCOTUS decision in the U.S. vs Arizona case, the Solicitor General of the United States Donald B. Verilli, Jr. said in a 2016 interview "the states were trying to supplant the federal government’s role in setting immigration policy, and we can’t have fifty different immigration policies. After the Supreme Court announced its decision this decision helped to deter other states from establishing and enforcing its own immigration policies."
Apparently existing immigration laws do not apply to California or they already seceded, but failed to announce it to the rest of the country.
9
This is an opportunity for California citizens and Jerry Brown to show Trump how to govern.
Since Brown has returned to the governors office for a fourth term, California has returned to fiscal stability and grown it's economy.
By the way, Jerry Brown is by no means a liberal politician. In his years of experience in various elected offices including Mayor of Oakland, he has learned to address each issue on its merits regardless of the politics.
8
Jerry Brown has always come from a motivation of public service and not political ambition. He was well-educated in all areas...religion, history, government, sociology, economics and science. He could be hard as nails when it came to the budget and balancing interests. But we were always better off with his decisions. For the second time, he is leaving the state with a healthy surplus and a thriving economy.
He is also a very good lawyer and would not have supported sanctuary laws that could not pass Constitutional muster. He has vetoed many popular laws that he felt would not be Constitution. He did not waster taxpayer money defending Prop 8 banning same-sex marriage. Guess he was right about that since SCOTUS agreed.
1
I depart from the liberal orthodoxy on immigration. Yes, international borders are artificial to begin with, and yes, I value human dignity. But the rule of law breaks down by the time you're rationalizing millions of illegal immigrants remaining in the country.
However, in my lifetime I've never seen a president and administration with so little respect for the rule of law, and so little ability to grapple with the nuances of a very complex situation. (I do support the "dreamers," for example.)
So, much as I think hyper-partisanship and grandstanding (on both sides) are bad for the country, I'm left with no choice but to root for California. There is no political center anymore.
4
California doesn't get to set its own immigration policy.
It is funny. Many of the people who were upset with Arizona pointed out that Federal law and Federal policy were supreme. Well that's still the case.
22
I believe two key points should be remember:
1. This is all a side show in trump's attempt to everyone to look away this own failures and Mueller's investigation. It also gives the Russians the opportunity to have more fun with us, which after reading some of these comments, is what is happening.
2. This is the result of the trump and the gop not doing their job. They are just sitting the offices (we all pay for) sitting on their hands doing nothing.
2
The citizens of California do not want sanctuary cities or state which make us unsafe in our own neighborhoods. These sanctuary policies have never been put up for a vote.
63
You do NOT speak for "the citizens of California" AT ALL. Your statement about "unsafe neighborhoods" due to the undocumented is a false right wing talking point designed to stir fear and resentment.
I live in an area with many undocumented immigrants, many of whom our Mexican-American family know through CHURCH, Baptist no less, and they are all working hard, raising families. Crime here is far less than what I experienced while living in Saint Louis, Missouri, a red state with far less undocumented immigrants and a city that ranks near the top of the nation for crime.
I am a native of California with a mother who is Mexican and I support the state in its efforts to protect our mixed-raced/status families who are law-abiding and contributing to our economy.
10
You, as a state, voted in the lawmakers who enacted these laws. That's how representative democracy works.
2
Sanctuary policies have been enacted specifically TO make us safe; they allow illegal immigrants to report crimes without being arrested themselves. If an illegal immigrant is beaten, or robbed, or raped, would you feel safer if it went unreported? I, for one, feel safer among illegal immigrants (who as I'm sure you know, commit fewer crimes than citizens) than violent criminals. To each his own?
5
ICE has very little police authority. They do important work, but as fugitive chasers they are little more than a combination of private process servers and bail bandit seekers. They do NOT have police authority, and the deportation fugitive warrants they enforce are civil and NOT criminal orders.
The guns, the bullet vests, the "POLICE" banners... I think it gives the officers a raison d'être rather than accurately reflect their authority. They do important work, but their deportee fugitive work is 99.9% symbolic.
9
Be patient. Perhaps we will have a unanimous decision from the Supreme Court; otherwise the concept of law will become folly.
1
Personally, I feel conflicted on this very complex issue, particularly when the abstract notions of what might be right and lawful are pitted against the human uncertainty and fear experienced by people living here illegally, the vast majority who are, most of us would agree , not criminals but people just wanting a better life; but I am distressed that the Left, in California and elsewhere, self righteously contents itself with calling opponents racists, xenophobes, heartless, dehumanizing, ignorant etc, as if the United States or any country had no right to have borders or enforce immigration law. (Both Mexico and Canada have stricter immigration laws than we do.) Can Mayor Schaaf and Kevin DeLeon and Governor Brown and Gavin Newsom and Mr. Becerra, and others at least clarify their immigration positions in an honest, transparent, and comprehensive way? Do they believe that anyone who makes it here without permission should be allowed residency and eventual citizenship? Is this tenable given the degree of human misery in this world? What is their vision? Is it perhaps more feasible for the rich countries to commit to a kind of Marshall plan for impoverished countries to make them more desirable places to live? This dialogue should have more honesty and less name-calling on both sides.
70
Spend some time reading our history of immigration laws. They have always had a discriminatory intent based on race, ethnicity and religion. Pay particular attention to the Chinese Exclusion Act which was not fully repealed until the 1960's. The proponents used the same arguments to stir up xenophobia against the Chinese that were brought as cheap laborers and then when the economy turned sour, every effort was made to deport them and to keep more from coming. But Congress did not fund the effort and for good reason There wasn't enough money and they could not hire enough people to do a thorough job. So, many Chinese stayed and prospered and had citizens who were citizens. Read the history of the Braceros, the Mexican guest workers, which is a repeat of the earlier history with the Chinese/Asians. They stayed after their contracts expired. Congress did a horrible job. Once again they made laws that could not be enforced as they lacked the funds.
So, we have cruel and unjust laws and they are sporadically enforced because there is not enough funding to do more. We are in desperate need of reform to make the laws fair, just, humane and practical. If you want people to obey the laws, make good laws that make sense and are humane.
1
It's about time! Thank you President Trump for rescuing us! Our so called leaders in California are so OUT OF TOUCH with reality and the desires of their electorate that it takes President Trump to save us.
Los Angeles and San Francisco are two of the highest crime cities in the United States and getting worse by the minute. We are under siege here and have have Mayors and an Attorney General that don't see it.
At least we have a President that cares about us!
50
"Los Angeles and San Francisco are two of the highest crime cities in the United States and getting worse by the minute."
This is FALSE.
According to the FBI, Los Angeles and San Francisco don't even show up in the rankings of the top 30 cities. I live here in the center of the city, am out often late at night, travel the Metro regularly, am a woman, and I see no siege, no overt crime, NOTHING of what you hysterically and hyperbolically describe as "under seige".
Furthermore, the President cares nothing about you or us and is only doing this to satisfy his base. Try doing some research first before making false claims or better yet, get out of your Fox News bunker and take a walk around the city for a dose of reality.
https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/most-dangerous-cities-in-the-united-...
3
Crime rates are lower among undocumented people than the crime rates of native citizens in general. You'll need to search for other scapegoats for your crime problems.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/fact-ch...
2
David, so happy to know that there are Californians who are not liberals, leftists and remember when Cali was the golden state it can be again. MCGA - Make California Great Again. Trump 2020.
2
So much for Conservatives and States Rights, their rallying cry so many times! The obvious risk is losing in court, the risk of a judge imposing a stay on immigration enforcement while this proceeds through the judicial system, including numerous appeals of whatever rulings, having to prove under oath that Sanctuary Cities prevents ICE from doing their job. Having to show how many criminals are being deported if the defense requests lists of deportees. Basically it seems that Trump is relying on his old bullying tactic of threatening and filing suits to intimidate people. His record in court filings since in office is not exactly glowing. And the American people are on the hook for his continued shenanigans!
12
The hypocrisy of California Democrats is transparent and over the top. The issue is not compassion, or pursuing the American Dream, or “California Values” , unless exploiting immigrants is one of them, the issue here is nothing but economic. California businesses, who control the Democratic Party here, have already made billions off these people and are now in the position of being entirely economically dependent on them. It’s reminiscent of problem of the the Southern states after the 13th Amendment. Look at the regressive tax structure here and the neglect of basic services like roads and schools and you will be reminded of Biden’s retort in the last Vice Presidential debate; “ Don’t tell me what your values are, show me your budget and I’ll tell you what your values are”. Compassion? Like a block of ice.
57
It is difficult to understand my Democratic Party. Illegals must be stopped from entering Our Country. They have no legal right to reside here and worse yet have babies that become Citizens automatically. Democrats are being alienated by this PC grandstanding that is backfiring. Pass an Amendment or just recognize that Illegals can't produce Citizens during the course of committing their crime!
53
I love you, California!
24
Maybe Trump and company will kick California, NY, Mass, ect out of America and then try to feed their "base" on what's left
17
No, they just want to kick the illegals out of America and of course I support that. Have come in the right way!
5
Stephen, Trump's base exists in every state including CA, NY and MA.
5
"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite."
James Madison
15
Ah, yes. Destroy the federal government to give free rein to state governments, until it's a state that Republicans have no control over . . .
21
“We’ve got to start charging some of these politicians with crimes,” he said. “These politicians can’t make these decisions and be held unaccountable for people dying. I mean, we need to hold these politicians accountable for their actions.”
Now that's an interesting point he's making. Can people sue, for instance, the Trump Administration for pricing them out of the health insurance market and leading to higher mortality rates among the uninsured? Can Pruitt be sued for dereliction of duty to protect the public from environmental harms?
The possibilities are practically endless.
44
Normally, in a matter like this, the Times quotes a law professor to state his view of the case. There is no such quote here and that may be because the case brought by the Justice Department is a hands-down winner. In Arizona v. United States, 567 US 387 (2012), all 8 justices who voted agreed that, pursuant to the Supremacy Clause "state laws are preempted when they conflict with federal law." I believe that sanctuary laws, the prohibition against sharing criminal information with the feds, and the prohibition against sharing immigrant employee records all conflict with federal law. If so, that's the end of the debate. I could be wrong, but it sure appears to me that there is nothing to discuss here. The feds win and California loses.
49
The federal government is trying to enforce federal law, duly enacted by Congress long ago, before Trump, by a Congress that comprised representatives elected by the people. Oh the outrage of it.
5
What conflict are you referring to? Immigration laws are the domain of the Feds (ICE agents) while local laws are the domain of local police departments. There is no obligation on the part of the local police to "ask for papers" in order to find so called "illegals" and detain those individuals for ICE agents. Local police do not want victims to fear coming forward to report crimes in California. Sessions lawsuit is payback for not agreeing to Trump's bigoted agenda.
2
Darn, I actually thought the president forgot about us here in California.
When Texas and Louisiana were under water & California was on fire, I couldn’t help but notice the President & his wife were happy to stand in puddles & toss paper towels in the South.
I honestly thought the president’s US map ended at the Rockies.
12
Wonder what Devin Nunes has to say? He represents California's 22nd District (Tulare), with a large undocumented immigrant labor presence and one of the largest Agricultural regions in the U.S. Along with Republicans, Kevin McCarthy, (Kern County- 23rd District) and David Valadao, (Kings County-21st District), the three Republicans represent districts with the largest known undocumented labor force in California, [protected by] a powerful Agriculture Lobby.
To no one's surprise-none of these districts have experienced California's ICE Raids since Jeff Sessions and Donald Trump declared war on California.
33
THIS.
Why haven't any Republican districts been targeted? NYTimes, why did you leave this very important fact out?
Agriculture is the heart of Republican districts here and undocumented labor is the foundation of California agriculture. Yet no raids are happening anywhere near the fields.
NYTimes you must look into this blatant political posturing!
2
Let's forget about citizens, who cares about them? Let's do all we can to protect illegal immigrants and prevent deportation of illegal immigrants who commit crimes. Way to go, Jerry!
56
Rather simple: withdraw all federal agents from California. All ... federal ... agents. Everyone would be happier.
9
Trump actually threatened to do this, expecting that crime would rise exponentially
Not everyone would be happier. Not Californians who don't want their state to turn into a third world country. Sure, the illegals would be so happy.
7
Trade wars are good! Is Trump ready to go to war with the 5th largest economy in the world?
14
"Your family is still called Corleone".
California is still part of the United States.
He knows how to waste money. Other people's money.
21
Anybody associated with Trump Admin., family, associates & brand are toxic...good luck getting jobs when Trump is impeached.
9
Thank you President Trump. It's about time.
Sincerely,
A San Francisco native
42
About time for what? More chaos? trade war? nuclear war? higher deficits? more sex scandals? more lies? more dumb tweets? more fake news?
more bullying? more Russian meddling?
1
I am happy to live in the diverse culture of Long Beach California. I have seen ICE arrest a person that was charged with a gang related criminal crime take that person into custody. I also see a prospering neighborhood with many immigrants that make my city all ready great before Trump ever made that slogan ugly.
13
As a California resident: finally
59
Jeff Sessions is coming to Sacramento tomorrow morning to make an important announcement. I wonder if they just stepped on his lines. It is sad and embarrassing that compassion and sense can find no perch in the White House these days.
11
California is defending the right of people to move here illegally and stay and to prevent federal laws from being enforced.
That is absurd.
And I am no Trump fan.
87
The Racist In Chief and a Justice Department bent on destroying civil rights rather than protecting them continue their war against their own country's most successful state.
Our country has gone so far off the rails, we can't even see the rails from here.
12
To some of you commenters who are racists and criticizing California....
may I ask you to consider how your state wd fare in our country w/o the plethora of money Ca provide the USA? The state is the 6th largest economy in the world!!! Why shd we bother w your petty ignorance and prejudice? I'm all for the USA 'sthree big West Coast states breaking off from this country, particularly states like Kentucky, W. Virginia, Arkansaw, Mississippi, who hardly bring a dime to this country's economy!!!
28
So true.
6
You can't break away without fighting the US Army. You would lose.
Bottom line is that California is still part of the United States. California may be able to refuse cooperation with federal law enforcment but it simply can't make laws that conflict with federal law and policy.
It will lose. We've been down this road before. Nullification is not a winning strategy.
3
I share your intense feelings but I hate Putin's Russia more. He would love to see the United States break up. He was funding the Calexit campaign which died as soon it was discovered that the man who started the campaign was living in Russia and married to a Russian.
No, we stay and must fight for the same federalism the South claims when for separation of church and state, women's rights to reproductive autonomy, health care for all, and civil rights for all non-white citizens.
1
I dare say that the trump administration ought to be expending what little time and energy is left in the rapidly sinking White House dealing with the many real problems threatening our nation rather than creating meaningless battles.
21
As much as this "administration" wants to be a dictatorship, we live in a constitutional republic. We have a 10th amendment that guarantees state's rights and individual rights.
It was put there to prevent just this sort of action by otherwise uncheckable power such as the administration is attempting to arrogate to itself.
Brown is right. This is a stunt. Trump's sadministration needs to continually stoke anger in its base and prevent focus on the daily losses the administration is taking. This one was needed to counter loss of Cohen and any focus on thinking about a trade war. Because Sessions is part of this game, he gets to stay on the Trump reality show.
They could instead have tried to shift attention to a North Korean peace initiative, but that would not stoke any anger to divide us as a nation against itself, thus this was chosen.
23
It is of course beyond ironic to see a states rights/10th amendment argument in the NYT comment section.
However as it turns out immigration law and policy do indeed happen to be among the powers that are solely the purview of the Federal government, not the states. California doesn't get to have its own immigration policy. We've been down this road before with Arizona and Georgia over immgration law.
5
It is difficult to comprehend what it is about these laws that so upsets Mr. Sessions. They would seem to merely codify a string of federal court decisions that prohibit local officials from honoring "detainers."
Now if California officials were to start to enforce California Penal Code section 538d I could understand Mr. Sessions getting exercised. 538d makes it a crime to wear insignia that says "police" when a person is not a California peace officer. And of course, ICE agents are not California peace officers.
But then again, this would not be the first time that the Trump administration has been involved in criminal activity.
18
California looks to be on solid legal ground. The feds can't require them to grant contracts for jail beds. If ICE wants jail space, it can build its own jails and staff them with its own people. Similarly, it appears to be perfectly Constitutional for the state to not allow its law enforcement personnel to cooperate with outside entities, especially considering the public safety risk of having a large fraction of the community refuse to cooperate with cops for fear of having themselves or people they know taken by ICE.
I agree with Gov Brown. This is a stunt by Sessions to both placate the child in the White House and to distract from the drum-beat of Mueller's investigation.
20
Ironically, most Republican state legislators are hoping California/DACA wins. That is because a win for California/DACA is a big win for states rights. I would call it 21st century nullification.
8
It's about time.
The downside is that my tax money is going to support the defense of these unlawful California laws.
48
Your tax money is going to support states like Arkansas, Mississippi, Kentucky. Oh you poor soul.
16
My tax money is also going to support ICE raids on the tip of the iceberg of the millions of people in the country who have no respect for US immigration law. Money well spent by a country that values its sovereignty.
4
The upside is that the undocumented Californians are essential to the survival of California agriculture while also keeping California beautiful. Imagine how overgrown your beautiful Sunnyside California would be without almost all your neighbors' current gardeners!
2
I understand that immigration law enforcement is a federal, not a state, responsibility but California Democrats are only hurting the chances of Democrats winning a majority in Congress where the immigration laws can be changed. As a lifelong Democrat, I believe the party should stand for the rule of law and enforcement of laws until such time as those laws are changed. No country in the world will long tolerate uncontrolled immigration. It only lays the groundwork for right-wing governments that will do more harm. It is how we got Donald J. Trump. Do Democrats want his successor to be even worse?
50
True that Congress is the place where change can happen, but for as long as this dysfunctional Congress does not make change to happen, I, as a Democrat, am all in for California to lead.
12
Abigail, you are expecting progressives to think about the consequences of their feel good policies. Their concern is to show their fellow progressives how very nice they are, lest they be accused of racism or xenophobia for upholding the rule of law. Trump won the election the day he came out against illegal immigration, which deeply offends the great majority of Americans who respect law and play by the rules. The UK voted for Brexit because they were fed up with uncontrolled immigration. The Italians just elected parties which promise to stem the flow of unemployable young men from Africa and the Middle East, and parties which oppose the destruction of their ancient cultures are on the rise throughout Europe.
The demand for open borders is leading to a backlash which could end western democracy. But, hey, who cares as long as we can show our friends that we are very very nice.
31
This is the same administration that believes "Due Process" is unduly burdensome and "Takes too long" (DJT). Trade wars will be effected "Lovingly"(DJT). And then there is tomorrow: The consequences of 62 Million unthinking Americans.
17
"standing in opposition on a number of issues, including marijuana, environmental regulations and taxes"
I find myself proud to be living in CA and ashamed to be an American.
27
It should be the opposite..
L
Please, never be ashamed to be an American. Fight for the good of being one
As the Attorney General of California Xavier Beccerra said
"States and local jurisdictions have the right to determine which policies are best for their communities."
17
No they don’t as we shall see the courts decide shortly.
2
Meanwhile the Dept formerly known as "Justice" spends its time eviscerating our basic liberties, the Federal government's commitment to civil rights and voting fairness, any pretense of regulation on Big Banks, environmental law, and generally tarnishing its own image...
But what did we expect from the likes of Sessions? Isn't it time for this lawless, toadying, right-wing partisan to step aside? Or be removed from office, along with his master?
18
Meanwhile, our country is infiltrated by a foreign power likely facilitated by the president himself. But there’s nothing to see here...
27
Somebody needs to tell Jeff Sessions that it hasn't been 1950 for quite some time. If they don't drop him in a bubble, I imagine that he may absolutely apoplectic tomorrow with all the non white faces that he will see.
13
Meanwhile US citizens in California are living in cardboard boxes and being arrested because they can't afford housing. You would think the state politicians would be more concerned with their US citizens rather than people who have broken laws multiple times. If your moving to California, give up your US citizenship and sneak in as an Illegal alien, you will fair better.
57
As a Californian born and raised, I can assure you we are not all living in cardboard boxes, myself included. California, like every state in the union, has a homeless problem, including Texas. Please think before you spout out unsubstantiated claims.
14
k bell:
1. People all over this country, including the great State of Texas, are homeless and living in tents, not only in California.
2. No one in California is being "arrested because they can't afford housing". That is a ridiculous comment.
3. You have no proof whatever that the people being rounded up by ICE are criminals and have "broken the law multiple times".
You take care of the great State of Texas - we can take care of California just fine.
8
I live in California as well and agree with k bells comment. My city is overflowing with homeless but they are wanting more and more funding for illegal immigrant defense money. Help for citizens first only seems right
5
Exactly what article of the Constitution are these California laws supposed to be violating? Or is Sessions just tossing the term "unconstitutional" around to please his & Trump's base?
13
Funny thing, how this Son-of-the-South Jeff Sessions-is a States Rights kind of guy, except when it comes to a state with a Democrat as Governor and one that his boss still believe cheated him out of his popularity contest by 3 million "illegal" voters: As David Bowie sang; "This Is Not America- Shala la la la."
21
I am too indignant for words.
8
Civil War Redux....coming soon to a theatre near you....
7
No civil war just compliance as the courts uphold the feds.
2
The tariffs are scary stupid. This lawsuit is just lame. These are the last desperate dying gasps of a chaos presidency.
16
While I agree that states should obey federal law, the simplistic way in which Sessions, Trump and Mr. Homan describe California's sanctuary laws distort the nature of the laws in such a way that misrepresents the goals and procedures of the law. The laws do not prevent the federal government and ICE from rounding up undocumented immigrants, it makes it so that they are not forced to hand over people of relatively minor crimes. Further, it does not prevent CA from collaborating in other forms of law enforcement activities.
Living in a community with numerous immigrants, I can see the capricious way that many ICE agents round up immigrants. Many pull immigrants over on their way to work, often on some flimsy pretext. By pulling over hardworking immigrants who do the unwanted jobs, ICE is wasting their time and resources. We would be better served if ICE focused on finding traffickers, and drug mules at the border.
18
I lived in California many years.
And lived when Mr Moonbeam was a governor then.
He is telling AG about "stunts" - we have seen a few before from him.
It's simply hard to believe what California is attempting to do.
This is not quite a "nullification" crisis prior to the Civil War - but it's coming close to.
And to trumpet it's GDP standing as if California has done it without help from other states in the Union.
Just to name one example - oil.
I have worked in the oil industry all my life - 45 years. California gets gas for it's vehicles because the Congress at one time forced Alaska to ship it's oil only to California refineries; even if it required these refineries to be modified to handle thus crude.
California gets its electricity today - generated in Texas.
Remember natural gas shortage and scams resulting from ridiculous California laws. Well, it comes from Texas and Louisiana and offshore production.
California with its own oil and gas has strangled our industry so they can import the same from other states and countries - all this to claim as a "green" state.
So, when the AG is filing a lawsuit on enforcement of laws - the other departments should look into California's trade policies - with other states.
And the Federal Congress should step up like it did prior to Civil War at the behest of Mr. Lincoln.
Talking about Lincoln - someone should remind California what happened to the "nullification" states some 150 years ago.
25
You seem to miss the importance that California has in the U.S. economy. You are objecting to national preferences that California has been granted in national legislation and policies, and you fail to mention that this is a very common legislative phenomenon benefiting through history many, many states.
Is this ignorance, or self-adopted tunnel vision?
The U.S. is already a place of which you do not, and never will, approve. Perhaps Tejas should withdraw from the Union, and rejoin Mexico.
9
Yes, I remember the scams -- perpetrated by Enron, in Texas.
8
Wasn't this decided already? Prints v US stated that the use of state officers to enforce federal laws was a violation of separation of powers. Not only that but it was decided by Hon. Scalia, who was a very conservative Justice. The Justices also decided that commandeering state officials for federal issues is a violation of the tenth amendment...
15
California will lose. How can you bar employers from cooperating with federal officials?
25
I think you have it backwards. The argument is that federal agency cannot compel state police forces to do federal agency’s job.
17
@GH..from the article.
"State lawmakers also passed the Immigrant Worker Protection Act, which prohibits local business from allowing immigration to gain access to employee records without a court order or subpoena. Mr. Becerra warned that anyone who violated the new law would face a fine of up to $10,000."
So yes California has barred private employers from cooperating with federal law enforcement on immigration matters.
This is what happens when the state legislature and exceutive branches have been captured by people who are more concerned with the wellbeing of foreign nationals than they are with American citizens.
7
This is truly lame. Being sued by the Trump Administration will be a gift that keeps on giving. From California's standpoint this is the best possible scenario. The political benefits are of course obvious: Being sued is a political bonanza. The economic benefits are also obvious. It makes California even more of a destination for immigrants, and immigration fuels economic growth. Finally, as a legal matter, the Supreme Court has already ruled that the federal government can't force a state to help the federal government perform its functions. Not only is California likely to prevail, the result will provide a blueprint for other states and cities if they want to pass laws that make ICE's job more difficult.
19
Illegal immigration fuels economic growth? A blueprint for other states? Arizona lost its case over its immigration law.
20
How can Trump’s Justice Dept. lose? Every argument cited in this piece made by Californians and implied by the reporters positively screams of a fundamental difference of opinion between California and the federal government on the acceptability of illegal immigration. We fought a civil war to decide who wins in such disagreements. Are we to fight another?
I know that California disagrees on this point, but they are NOT really sovereign. South Carolina once believed similarly, and see where that conviction got THEM.
36
But, Richard, what about the Republican mantra of States' Rights Above All Else? Does that only apply to concealed carry laws and restrictions on reproductive rights?
17
stu:
When did responsible Republicans believe in "states' rights above all else"? This is a nation, not a loose collection of largely-autonomous cultural constructs, and it was Republicans who won a civil war to vindicate that principle.
6
There is a thing called the Constitution. It defines very clearly obligations and powers of regional, state, and federal government authorities. Without some clear and constitutional statutory authority, there is no obligation that a state, or its authorities, follow orders to help a federal police effort. No such statute exists regarding immigration enforcement.
By the way, California WAS cooperating with immigration enforcement under the rational efforts during the Obama era.
Sovereignly yours,
King G
2
Wow, this is unfortunate reporting. There's no reason to cite the uniformly bigoted Center for Immigration Studies on basic information that the reporters could have researched on their own, and no excuse for doing so without acknowledging CIS's ties to white nationalism or listing as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.
11
I'm sure the Republicans who always harp on states' rights will come to California's defense. Because they aren't at all hypocrites. Sure, that's the ticket.
14
Just like liberals flocked to the defense of Arizona and Georgia, yes?
Because liberals believe that states should be able to set their own immgration policy...or does that only apply to Califonia.
4
It is disappointing we need the US government to make Xavier Becerra do his job, which is to represent the legal interests of Californians, rather than spending his time and our money working to ensure illegal aliens remain in the state.
40
As I read all of the comments here, my stomach turned. Ask most Americans if they are hurt by the immigrants, and those who have racial bias or are Hard Right will say yes. Fact of the matter is that we were doing just fine. Yes, arrest REAL criminals, and deport them. The working immigrants are doing us all a service. Want to pay $3 for one orange or $5 for an avocado?
Our Justice department, if Sessions is all hot under the collar, should go after the NRA instead who are undermining the will of 97% if Americans who would like to keep our kids safer in schools by mandatory deep background checks and the majority who want the ban on assault weapons reinstated. THESE are the criminals who are destroying our democracy, not the minimal wage earners who keep the wheels of commerce oiled and running smoothly, send their kids to school, and would pay taxes if they were allowed legal status to work.
38
There are plenty of American citizens who have been hurt by immigration, particularly illegal immigration. Note that no one in this story is picking fruit.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-discrimination-temporary-staff...
7
For all of those who are suddenly waxing indignant about the “rule of law” and federal rights: don’t we hear from conservatives non-stop how Roe/Wade has to be returned to the control of the states? So my bodily autonomy and financial prosperity is a plaything of local lawmakers, but a state like California can not decide who we want and don’t want to keep within our borders? All this talk about “illegals” is just talk: Trump is after legal immigration. ICE has started deporting green-card holders. Trump publicly declared that he wants to limit legal immigration to protect “American jobs”. What a joke! Americans cannot do the jobs that immigrants do because they are not educated enough for high-tech nor hard-working enough for agriculture and service. We will protect our rights against this xenophobic, stupid and narrow-minded administration!
29
I think the concern is actually the opposite. Federal law, as determined under Roe v. Wade, guarantees the right to abortion. Some states put limits on it, some of which were ruled constitutional and some unconstitutional (i.e., undue burden standard from Casey decision). We don't want conservative states to be able to go even further & say, hey, look, California can completely exempt itself from any cooperation with and enforcement of federal immigration law so we will now do the same with respect to abortion law.
Can you imagine if Mississippi or Texas decided to follow California's example? And to, in practice, de facto ban the federal right to abortion by prohibiting all state licensed medical officials from providing an abortion and by prohibiting all state officials, state police, state bureaucrats, state health care officials, etc. from doing anything to support the federal right to abortion? Requiring the national guard or US Army to go into these states to protect a woman's right to choose?
Or if Alabama chose to follow California's example and said, fine, yes, we understand federal law prohibits "separate but equal" but we are going back to "separate but equal" and prohibit any of our state officials; state educators, etc. from doing anything to cooperate with feds on this? I.e., it's not our job, you feds care about integration, you be the ones to enforce it. We fought these battles before & California now wants to throw that all away. Bad idea.
16
California has 40 million people! Somehow, someday we have to think about stopping the ceaseless population growth and start shrinking the population.
There is not enough housing, freeways,clean air and water to support runaway massive population growth. The departure of a few million people would improve the quality of life in California and reduce poverty.
25
Mark I don’t know how often you get out of the house but California has enough land and resources to house twice as many people as it does. High-density urban development is both more ecologically sound and economically advantageous than suburban sprawl. In my travels around the state I’m constantly astonished as how empty it is and how the land is used in wasteful and inefficient ways. Maybe we need more Chinese immigrants to show us how to build futuristic cities, great public transportation and proper tourist and industrial infrastructure.
Wow! Gov. Brown says that the lawsuit filed by the Trump Administration is a "Publicity Stunt". I'm confused by this statement because looking from the outside in, living in another state: it looks like the state of California is playing the same game.
24
After Obergefell v. Hodges, the prevailing comments in the Times were to the effect that no state had the right to defy Federal law. Somehow, I see a different voice when Federal law is not to the left's liking. How is Mayor Libby Schaaf of Oakland any different from Kimberly Jean Davis, the county clerk for Rowan County, Kentucky who also refused to obey Federal law due to her conscience?
31
Mayor Schaaf didn't defy any federal law. She spoke and warned of an impending round ups by ICE. She has the right to speak out. Federal law, the First Amendment gives her that right. California residents whether documented or not have the right to Constitutional protections. If the Feds, ICE, wants to see their employer's records, let them get a search warrant from a judge. If they want to house detainees in facilities we own, built and maintain, we have an obligation to make sure they are treated decently, and not for instance denied access to toilet facilities even if the Feds are paying rent. Hopefully the racist, xenophobic havoc sought by the Trump administration will be defeated in California. We value immigrants and diversity here.
10
Lisa - I give you U.S. Code Title 18 Part I Chapter 73 § 1502:
Whoever knowingly and willfully obstructs, resists, or opposes an extradition agent of the United States in the execution of his duties, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
Sounds like a violation of Federal law to me.
The New York Times writes about it being Trump's agenda. Immigration law is the law created by the United States Senate and the House of Representatives. It was approved by a president. It is not Trump's law. The Trump Administration is simply enforcing the laws that are already passed.
45
Our GDP places California as the 7th largest in the world. 19 other States follow our lead on automobile & light truck pollution specifications. We have the broadest based economy of ANY State in the nation. Yes, we certainly have many problems, but hatefulness, as from Trump-Pence, is not significant here.
Go ahead Donnie & Minni Donnie, make our day!
17
So, it appears California would prevent the federal government from auditing e-verify records?
What next? They won't have to pay federal taxes?
23
Margo, you've got it all wrong! Trump's Federal taxes have now taken money away from our state taxes? Why do the Feds get to double dip on my income???
7
There has, since this nation was founded, been an underlying tension between states and the federal government. States have taken the position that they not the federal government, have the prime responsibility for the conduct of their citizens. Ouur Civil War was an early example of that conflict. In the current age Federally mandated civil rights and other social legislation has been accepted to be in Washington's purview. The large number of immigrants from Mexico and South America that reside, work, go to school
and pay taxes in California must be treated as residents, if not citizens. Instead of blocking sanctuary laws designed to protect residents our federal government should be working, in conjunction with the states, to create an orderly path to citizenship. Until then the status quo should remain with the clear exception of serious criminal conduct on the part of individual immigrants. Once a path to citizenship has been agreed upon we can remove those who do not make the effort to obtain their citizenship.
11
My first thought was almost identical to Brown's: "At a time of unprecedented political turmoil, Jeff Sessions has come to California to further divide and polarize America."
We desperately need a new president who is actually interested in uniting us.
35
A major part of the issue is that ICE targets undocumented aliens and declares them to be "criminals" because they are undocumented. If ICE limited its efforts to those convicted of other "crimes" than being here without permission--and the derivatives resulting from that status--I'm sure local authorities would support that effort.
237
Aside from the fact that if you are here illegally you are a criminal ICE is targeting those who have committed crimes over and above entering illegally, driving without a license and ID theft. People who have committed those crimes are not in jail. If the state and localities would cooperate with ICE and allow them to pick up those who were convicted of crimes and are in jail those non-criminals would not be in harm's way. Eventually, they need to go but they are not being targeted now.
16
Well yeah they ARE criminals the minute they commit unlawful entry into the US - a misdemeanor
Then there is the non-stop use of forged ID or stolen ID (felonies) and the felony of perjury every time they sign an I-9 form to work and the felony of uttering (using their forged or stolen ID)
SO yep everyone of them commits felonies as well as the misdemeanor of umlawful entry into the US!
40
no, that is not true.
4
Good luck Jeff in bringing my state to heal
11
That is what CA and these folks get for turning rogue. Get ready to empty the coffers.
18
prepare to loose Nov 5.
6
The key difference between the Trump lawsuits against the states and the Obama lawsuits against the states is that the Obama lawsuits sought to protect the RIGHTS of people while the Trump lawsuits sought to TAKE AWAY the rights of people.
26
The Trump Administration is maintaining the rights of people. They are protecting the rights of people who did not sneak into this country. Trump Administration is preserving the rights of legal immigrants.
32
@georgeyo
"The Trump Administration is maintaining the rights of people.. . ." etc.
I guess that's what it looks like when you live in the "through the looking glass" world of "alternative facts" that is Trumpland.
Your comment illustrates precisely what George Orwell predicted in "1984", and explained and codified in "Politics and the English Language"
When the POTUS and most of his supporters live in a world where no one cares about facts or truth, when anything he or they disagree with is dismissed as "fake news" or a "witch hunt," then we are all truly lost
War is Peace; Freedom is Slavery; Ignorance is Strength.
8
You provide opinion but no facts. Facts ARE important, Clairette;
2
U.S. Constitution, Article VI
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof ... shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution...."
Is California (i.e. California Dems who completely control California)
cruisin' for a bruisin'?
We will see what happens in court.
And also what happens at the polls in November.
19
Sam Finn, another great post. MCGA. Make California great again. Trump 2020.
2
As a progressive and compassionate New Yorker I was really hoping that we'd be the first state to be sued by Queens' gift to the nation. Oh, well; good luck, Jerry! We'll be rooting for you.
25
Ask Preet Bharara to please get a move on and charge this obscenity of a man with state crimes. He can't keep ruining the country from Attica.
10
(The Head of the) House Divided is continuing his racist, bigoted efforts to deepen the fractured and broaden the distance between the open minded and close minded people.
12
Didn’t we fight the Civil War over this issue? A state, no matter how well intentioned, may not defy federal law.
There’s no way the Supremes will support California on this.
158
There is no federal law that requires states to assist federal agencies.
Murder is not a federal crime and unless there is evidence of some federal crime the FBI doesn't investigate murders, even mass shootings like Parkland Florida because they don't have jurisdiction. The reverse is also true. The states don't enforce immigration law unless there is some state crime committed because they have no jurisdiction.
Are you proposing a national police force to be at the beckon call of the ten- pot dictator in Washington?
20
But what can they do? Jail the entire leadership of California?
6
Unfortunately we have 8 legitimate Supreme Court Justices and one criminally appointed one.
So no-one in California cares what they decide any more.
9
It will be interesting to see Jeff Sessions try to prosecute all of the people in CA who create and enforce the state and local laws that he disagrees with - The governor, the AG, the state legislators, the county and municipal executive and legislative official. Why stop there? Why not all of the Dems in CA?
The actual point of our laws and policies is to protect our citizens and the other people who live in our state from the negative effects of national policies and laws that make it harder for our officials to do their real jobs. Their real jobs do not include being extensions of the federal government. ICE and other federal officers and officials can absolutely enforce federal laws here. In the area of immigration, our state officers and officials are very willing to help the feds arrest "bad dudes" (of either gender, actually). They just won't help the feds strike fear into significant parts of our population, fear that prevents people from cooperating with our state and local law enforcement efforts.
So until the 10th Amendment is repealed, my guess is that California will go on being California. I don't think many people in our state are interested in having it become Alabama. And includes people from the red parts of California, parts that are very often agricultural and are heavily dependent on immigrants, documented or otherwise.
29
The State of California is an economic engine, and generates far more revenue than what it gets from the rest of the USA and the federal government.
Republican, conservative thinking was that freedom applied to the States, and to people. If one person wanted to sell his or her labor, and another buy it --good. If a State elected its leaders and had a winning formula, the better.
Yet today Republicans have become lovers of regulation, no longer protectors of freedom, having ejected their past in favor of racialist xenophobia.
California, given the expression of its population via its elected representatives, should ignore and eject so-called "federal" intrusions and assert its rights --till this putative "union" and the White House reflects America's values, to have California part away from the Federal Government is what America's values demand.
[And of course this is all demagoguery --if Mr. Sessions really wanted to stop illegal immigrants, he just needs to throw a handful of CEOs doing the hiring in jail. Problem solved.]
22
California should SECEDE! Stop giving money to the feds to squander!
14
Agreed. After all, California does a better job at squandering taxpayer money.
14
When did environmentalists switch from 'limited resources' to 'growth: full speed ahead', because I missed the memo. Has a reporter ever asked when they were blinded on the road to Damascus? Were they in a bus?
Jerry Brown 1.0 agonized over sustainability; 2.0 agonizes over how to more quickly move Mexicans to California. Obama spoke against immigration's effects on American workers just before he was elected president. Then he met the Davos billionaires who fund the retirements of all globalist politicians, $100 million base from speeches alone for presidents, Tony Blair...
When did Democrats in particular make the change from protecting American workers, borders, & environment to finding that unspeakably repellent?
35
About the time that the Sierra Club accepted hedge funder David Gelbaum's $100 million "gift" - with strings attached - i.e., its condition that Sierra Club support de facto open borders and unlimited amnesty for all 7 and a half billion of the human species not yet currently within US borders. Yes, they purged Democratic Governor Dick Lamm and many other dedicated environmentalists to focus on the red herring of global warming, while sticking their heads in the sand like an ostrich on the issue of population growth. Which is not to diminish global warming as an issue but can anyone imagine it would be half the issue had there been an all out effort to stabilized global population at 5 to 6 billion instead of continuing to hurtle on to now close to 8 billion; and projected to continue to 9 billion; then 10 billion; then 11 billion; and maybe, maybe, leveling off sometime after 11 to 12 billion. . .
16
The immigrants ICE is rounding up are doing jobs no white American wants to do. The farmers in California’s Central Valley, where most of these workers end up, are already screaming because they can’t get their crops in, due to a lack of workers now, while at the same time supporting this ridiculous roundup, and this ridiculous administration. Jeff Sessions is a horrifying racist, always has been. It will be interesting to see how this comes out. We could potentially have the power to arrest and prosecute any politician whose views we don’t like. Yes, trump and Beauregard, let’s do make America great again. We have a White House full of documented criminals to get rid of.
5
Ok. Fine. Let’s give them temporary visas to do the work but pay them and apply American labor protections. That would remove the financial incentives for California businesses and be a true representation of progressive values.
6
“‘We’ve got to start charging some of these politicians with crimes,’ he said. ‘These politicians can’t make these decisions and be held unaccountable for people dying.’” What hypocrisy. Let’s apply these same words to gun control and see how far we get.
522
And to healthcare, social programs etc.
9
It is hyperbolic comments like those that need to be addressed. The local politicians are responsible for local public safety first.
The Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution to limit the powers of the Federal Government and to support the powers of the state and local governments to make their own laws and enforce them. The amendments were also to protect the individual from the Federal Government by guaranteeing certain rights and freedoms. One of these was 'due process' which is available to all and not just citizens. ICE is bound by the same rules. Sessions knows that. He is abusing his powers for political points and his own personal biases.
1
Threatening arrest of opponents is a classic move of autocratic countries. We've already moved several steps closer to fascism with the labeling of corporations as people, enacting tax laws and tariffs to benefit and place more wealth and power in the corporations and ultra-rich, taking power away from unions that fight for the rights of the workers, believing that the Attorney General of the United States should "have his back", attempting obstruction of justice with the firing of the Director of the FBI and investigating ways to stop the Mueller investigation, and with Trump's continued calls for arresting and jailing his political opponents without due process and also for those who would legally enact legislation in their own states constitutionally. Hillary Clinton said she was worried that Trump would call for another Constitutional Convention. Perhaps we should heed that.
1
The "Trump Administration" didn't sue the Moonbeams. The United States of America did. It did so to stop the illegal obstruction of Federal justice by those who think an illegal, criminal alien deserves sanctuary at the expense of productive citizens who obey the law of the land. Any public official who warns criminals that a lawful raid is about to occur is obstructing justice and should be summoned to face the music.
31
Trump-Pence directed the DoJ to file the suit; therefore, Trump-Pence have sued CA.
By the way, CA law requires criminals to be turned over to Federal authorities. . .at stake is the Federal Government's intrusion into the State's security - violation of State's rights (something you all from the South have ranted about since 1789).
2
@C F Boyle Jr S C
1. California is not "obstructing" justice in refusing to assist in using its resources to assist federal agents in enforcing federal law. Look it up.
2. "Illegal" and "criminal" are not synonyms for "undocumented"
3. California, population 40,000,000, is larger than many countries; California has the 6th largest GDP on the planet; California grows over 400 commodities and is the 5th largest supplier of food to the world; California is the national leader in technology and a newly revitalized aerospace industry; and etc.
4. I think anyone would have to agree that California is a state filled with "productive citizens".
5. For these and other reasons, it seems somewhat inappropriate for a resident of the Palmetto State to be so critical of the engine of production and creativity that is California: South Carolina is a "moocher" state, receiving $7.87 back from Washington for every $1 its citizens pay in federal tax.
6. What percentage of that dole comes from taxes paid by hard-working Californians, many of whom are undocumented, but not criminals
6
A comment below suggested we look up Printz V. United States. I did. That was the best comment by far. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printz_v._United_States
11
Confirms, Trump picked a fight he can't win, AGAIN.
Scalia and Thomas sided with this decision.
The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act's interim provision commanding the "chief law enforcement officer" (CLEO) of each local jurisdiction to conduct background checks, §922(s)(2), is unconstitutional.
1
If Eric Holder could sue Arizona over SB 1070 why can't Jeff Sessions sue California over its attempt to subvert federal law?
19
Thomas D. Homan, the acting director of United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement“We’ve got to start charging some of these politicians with crimes,” he said. “These politicians can’t make these decisions and be held unaccountable for people dying.
Excuse me sir, but whose dying? I mean I really want to see the numbers of crimes committed per year by dreamers vs. 'legal' Americans and see what the real data - not fake and made-up and scare mongering data- says! You go California!! Trump and is GOP cronies need you and your GDP more then you need this continuous headache they are causing every American...
19
Illegal immigrants have killed many people including two sheriff's deputies in my part of the state of California. There are many records of illegal immigrants killing innocent victims. People are dying. Dying at the hands of illegal immigrants.
16
The politicians who are being "held unaccountable for people dying" are those who are preventing sensible gun control.
7
Betsy in Tokyo, Japan - you may want to ask Mary Ann Mendoza; Jamiel Shaw, Jr; Sabine Durden; Steve Ronnebeck; Don Rosenberg; or any of the many other parents who have lost children because of illegal aliens. Whatever the statistics, the difference with US citizens or legal immigrants who commit crimes is at least, in contrast to illegal aliens, they do have the legal right to be here. They did not begin their existence in America by flaunting the nation's laws. Once a US citizen or legal immigrant commits a crime, they then are hopefully apprehended and prosecuted. In some jurisdictions, it is now being reported that some illegal aliens such as DACA recipients are not even being prosecuted and/or receive sweetheart deals so as to preserve their DACA status, which does not allow for more than a certain number of crimes (and no major crimes).
BTW, Japan is known to have very strict citizenship laws and laws regulating immigration. Are you saying that borders and immigration laws are good for Japan and the other 190+ nations besides the United States but not for the USA?
15
I was born and raised in California as my parents, grandparents and great grand parents. If the republicans want "states rights" then listen to me - Do not tread on us. You thugs can sue, can complain, and bloviate. Trespassing on our borders. breaking apart families and messing with our economy and our environment, will bring a "reckoning".
43
Yes, Jefferson Beauregard should be careful what he wishes for.
4
Oh GROW UP!!
You sound exactly like the state legislature of South Carolina in...oh...1861!
What is next for California? Raising an army and fighting it out
Your sort of silliness was resolved in 1865 and here is a hint how it came out - your views LOST
18
Another complete waste of time to satisfy the xenophobic base. If you are going to go down in flames politically, go big!
Now, if trump was really interested in limiting illegals, he’d have a policy that each businessman who hires one gets a $100,000 fine and a year in jail. But no, the Grand Awful Party has to blame the individuals who work 12 hour days for next to no money doing a job no white American wants.
79
Give it time.
1
So, a racist Attorney General, serving an illegitimate president, threatens to sue California for not actively assisting in the racially targeted rounding up of undocumented workers. How republican, how repugnant, how predictable.
62
Illegitimate president? How is President Trump illegitimate?
15
Wasn't he "elected" by much, much less than 50%+1 of the voting population? And that's with the relentless support of Mr. Putin.
1
Seems to me that one of the favorite euphemisms of these right wing fanatics has always been "States' Rights". I guess that only applies to racist (i.e., trumpist) states.
49
Wasn't this issue already litigated during the Civil War and Civil Rights Movement?
The states can't decide to thwart the supremacy of federal law just because their local constituency doesn't want to abide by it.
This is the same reason why the feds could come down and arrest every single person working in the "legal" marijuana industry if they determined to. Federal law remains supreme.
24
Your analogy doesn't make sense. I think you should read the article again.
California isn't preventing ICE from deporting illegal immigrants. They passed laws that say the fed has to go it alone if they want to detain/deport people in the state.
What if there is a federal ban on assault weapons and the fed knocks on your governor's door and asks for names of all the assault weapon owners in your state so they can be arrested? How would you react?
There's a sound argument for *not* cooperating with ICE if you actually care about public safety or stopping crime. For example, local police greatly benefit from the cooperation of the community they are duty-bound to protect, but they are certainly less likely get to help if community members fear it will lead to their arrest. This is part of the rationale behind sanctuary laws. Maybe it's just coincidence but, despite what conservative "media" would have you believe, (sanctuary) cities are safer than ever.
You may disagree with my argument but at least it's an honest one. You and a number of commenters either don't understand our have chosen to misrepresent the facts. It undermines whatever it is you're trying to say.
5
B Balla -- the argument is based on the fact that California passed laws like the "Restriction on Cooperation with Workplace Enforcement" which makes it illegal under state law to comply with federal immigration officials. That isn't some kind of neutral "you're on your own, feds" posture. That sounds more like George Wallace standing in the doorway blocking the feds from integrating the school (legally speaking), where the state is actively thwarting the enforcement of federal law.
2
"Thomas D. Homan, acting director of the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement, says " We've got to start charging some of these politicians with crimes." he said. "These politicians can't make these decisions and be held unaccountable for people dying. I mean, we need to hold these politicians accountable for their actions. "" Exactly my sentiment, except the topic of accountability needs to be Gun Control, and the willful obeisance of the Republican Party to the NRA. The GOP lack of action has resulted in massacre after massacre in this country. What they accept is no less than blood money.
16
Jerry Brown v. Jefferson Beauregard Sessions?
My governor's got this. Thanks, Jerry!
41
Sigh. Another Californian here wishing we could escape from the hellscape this nation has become. Secession isn't practical, states' rights are only acknowledged when convenient, and the white nationalist fervor that is so obviously behind this anti-immigrant stance seems to portend our future.
It's hard to be hopeful when we're so out of step with so much of our own country.
19
Oh, THIS is how Trump makes America great again! Attack the humanity and free will of the people who hired him with their votes. So much for unity. Sad to say that his ratings among his base will probably go up. And those poor people will continue to pay for his re-election rallies. Immigration is here to stay. The GOP refused to come to the table under Obama because he might actually have worked out a reasonable compromise. I am glad that there are politicians and people of conscience who still honor what it is to have human compassion instead of hatred fanning the flames of discrimination and selfishness. With a country still as rich as ours, there is no reason that an equitable amnesty couldn't be granted. After all, Reagan did it.
10
I am an independent who has typically voted Democrat. And I hate to say it but the Democrats did exactly the same, many of them (including Bernie Sanders, who caucuses with Democrats) refused to come to the table under G.W. Bush when there was a supposedly reasonable compromise on immigration in spring of 2007. It seems both parties actually have no interest in coming to a compromise because they do not want whichever other party is in the current majority to get any credit for immigration reform. They both prefer it as a wedge issue.
Trump's "Four Pillars" reform, based heavily on Barbara Jordan's Commission from President Clinton's tenure, seems very reasonable (i.e., DACA legalization, + legalization of additional 1.2 million non-DACA enrollees who might otherwise have qualified; elimination diversity lottery; substituting merit-based admission for chain migration; and the silly border wall). So even though it was based on the conclusions of a bipartisan commission led by a Democrat, during the presidency of a Democrat, of course today's Democrats then refused it because today's GOP might get credit. Oh vey!
21
RE: "[...] the number of people arrested has not dramatically increased so far. In December, the most recent month for which data is available, 1,715 unauthorized immigrants in California were arrested by ICE, compared with 1,379 in December 2016."
That's over a 24% increase from December 2016 to December 2017. I'm just sayin'...
6
Wasn't it Republicans who argued repeatedly in recent years in favor of the Tenth Amendment? I guess that only applies when a state does "conservative" things.
18
It was only a matter of time before this 'administration' got sue happy.
After all, it is what Trump knows best.
Strangely, though, there is some merit to this. There are many millions of people who go through a rigorous process to enter the country. This is about protecting those who have not done so.
But, I suspect this may be a tool for distraction against the creeping Mueller investigation.
5
Obama's lawsuit against Arizona that targeted undocumented immigrants, made its way up to the Supreme Court, which ruled that parts of the law were unconstitutional because they went against Congress’ right to set federal immigration policy.
My bet is on SC to hand down a humiliating defeat to California's penchant to be the gang lookout for all things criminal.
And for Trump to sue them to bankruptcy if they have any money left from the tax bill and the steel tariff.
12
There is a difference between a law that mandates state actions that actively interfere with federal policy and a law that mandates non-cooperation. The federal government can't compel cooperation in this case.
California does not have enough water to support the millions of undocumented labor units that are currently occupying the lowest rungs of its economy.
15
But, of course there is enough water to continue irrigating untold numbers of private lawns and golf courses throughout the state.
If all the "illegal" immigrants are rounded up and deported, who is going to e harvest all the fruits and vegetables in the state; I doubt very much it is going to be those who have gone the legal route. Only the most desperate are going to work in the dreadful conditions of the agricultural fields for extremely low wages.
5
The Federal government, like most Republican States, are running huge deficits while eliminating essential human services. California is both meeting the needs for services and banking surpluses. I'd say California is on the right track. Bring it on Mr Sessions. we're ready to fight you here in California, we have human dignity on our side.
700
Except that California is facing yet another deficit as high income wage earners and business leave California in droves. The schools rank among the lowest performing in the US and the state has become overrun with the homeless. Tuition costs continue to escalate, forcing California students to attend universities in other states. The infrastructure of the state is falling apart and the only thing that Jerry Brown is focused on is his 100 billion dollar high speed rail which is located in pasture land that will service about 1000 people. So I would suggest you reconsider your belief that California is on the right track. I have lived here all my life and it clearly is being run by a single party cartel, much like Venezuela.
23
"we have human dignity on our side" But not the law. Preventing the enforcement of federal law regarding people in the US illegally is just plain stupid.
5
... and California's roads are the best in the Nation. Please tell CalTrans I said "hello, thanks for your magnificent civil engineering on CA 299 from Redding to Eureka." I will do my best to inform the flyover states that California has actually turned things around and yes, it is a liberal state. Wisconsin and Kansas could learn from California.
As stated by others, state and local law enforcement cannot be forced to do the bidding of federal law enforcement.
can California sue Sessions and Trump for misuse of public funds on this suit ?
17
State all you want...Fed laws trump states laws. Period.
7
Do the Feds have standing to sue? Absolutely. PROCEED.
32
I remember clearly the day I showed up to substitute teach at a local middle school north of San Francisco with a heavy, Latino student population. I had worked at this school before and recognized many of the students who were usually friendly and inquisitive. This particular day was different. It had been reported in the local community that an ICE raid was imminent. Not only was attendance in my class low, there was a depressing pall that permeated the classroom; students stared off into space with unfocused, empty expressions.
Jeff Sessions’ latest move is yet one more national distraction, a way to curry favor with a president who regularly maligns both him and our nation’s immigrant community.
I feel deep gratitude toward Governor Brown, the mayors of Oakland, San Jose and Berkeley, among others, who have spoken out against this administration’s immigration policies. The are defending our state against the creeping fascism of this administration, one that threatens daily our once great nation.
78
So what you're saying is your employment depends on the presence of illegal immigrants, so... Sorry, that's not good justification.
7
bring it on, bigots! there are more constructive manners to mitigate immigration...but let's face it, this is justifying racism and a means to begin a new genocide. let's tackle the real issues that have little to do with unauthorized immigrants: guns (most atrocities involving guns are marginally committed by immigrants), tax evasion, universal health, affordable housing, equal opportunities for education, equality for all humans and let's not forget a foreign government involved in American media and elections manipulation.
21
This latest assault by the racists Trump and Sessions are simply a distraction of the looming trade wars disaster; the pending indictments of more of Trump's "best people,"; the Conway-Hatch Act controversy; the recently uncovered MOU betwen Trump and Putin; the NY-NJ tunnel brouhaha; and on and on.
7
For those parroting “Ilegal is illegal,” well so is physically abusing your wife, White House advisers endorsing a product line, and White House advisers advocating for or against political candidates, pedophilia, and violating court orders and continuing to engage in illegal racial profiling. Trump is perfectly willing to ignore these crimes. The hypocrisy reeks.
683
This is the sort of "thinking" that too many Alice B. Toklas brownies induces.
5
I'll bet you conflate Murder and Jaywalking too, right? Both are crimes but one may get you the death sentence. Seriously, comparing a ridiculous Hatch Act violation and illegal immigration? Get real.
2
Using the illegal activities of others to justify ones own illegal activity is something I'd expect to hear from A Fox "News" advocate, not a thinking american. People in the US illegally can't stay.
5
So pleased the State of California has former Attorney General Eric Holder on retainer go up against Sessions.
26
I know it happened during my lifetime but I wish someone would honestly tell me when; when did our nation decide it must abandon common sense immigration laws? Who said we must accept illegal (I know that word is banned from our vocabulary) immigrants in the US?
Before you spurt like a volcano, understand, I admire many people from many nations, races, ethnicities, and religions. I speak three-plus languages, English, Spanish, and French and enough of several Native American dialects to know common phrases and, particularly, when I'm being shined on. I've lived and worked on every continent, as well as Britain, on Earth.
Again, I ask my original questions - plus - how can any state be allowed to defy U.S. law?
I am by no means a fan of our current White House resident or his devisive, and often dangerous, policies. Nor do I believe this spoiled, entitled, self-absorbed draft dodger cares the least bit about the rule of law - just convenient words to him.
But, in this case, this is a question at the heart of our national faith in a lawful government founded in and on law.
One of my great, great, grandfathers immigrated from Ireland. I have a copy of the document he held second in pride to only his citizenship - his immigration papers. The rest of my ancestors, Scotch, Germany, French, English, and Native American, were here before such papers became a law but I imagine they also followed the laws of the times.
Where did we as a nation drift off course so far?
91
Answer: 2016.
2
Law as written is cold and lacking in humanity. It doesn't matter what your ancestry is or how long your family has been here, that is history done and dusted and provides with no more value to you opinion than that of a 15y.o. who was born here from parents who came here by a non-traditional fashion. The situation is that the president sets the tone for federal law enforcement and the point that Trump is a racist and probably doesn't know anything about it and I doubt he has not endeavored to learn.
This nation is not adrift but the current administration is trying to push it away from an almost sensible path to a nation that does not welcome people of color or the wrong religion. These conservatives are a selfish lot and it shows in their leadership with tax breaks for the most well off and don't believe in fair distribution of wealth.
We are not obligated to follow unlawful orders or illegal laws. Laws should be applied with compassion and busting in places and arresting parents whose children were born here is not humane and does not benefit anyone.
We have to hold on for 3 more years and the worst, most unequipped person to be President will be gone and his criminal aides and advisers that he has filled the swamp with will be in jail.
5
They are messing with the wrong state. California will not be dictated to by the likes of Trump and Sessions. California is a power house. It's a great American state.
29
Hold on...I thought it was Texas that says---Don't mess with Texas. Now you are saying it's wrong to mess with California. What gives?
3
Mason, CA has to follow federal laws just like every other state in this country,
2
No state or other jurisdiction should be allowed to interfere with the administration of federal law. It should be federally illegal for such a jurisdiction to make it official policy. It's "aiding and abetting."
33
And you would apply that same legal principle against Texas, for example, when they restrict women’s reproductive rights? Can we move to arrest the governor of Texas because he has been instrumental in denying women access to abortions? And I am the only NYT reader who is wondering why all the conservative anti-immigration posts?
6
I thought that republicans loved the term "States Rights"
6
I can only wonder if they would be taking such a hard stance if the immigrants were Norwegian, Irish, German. I say this as a white woman of English and Irish descent.
I work in the social services department of a high school in Northern California. Last month, a well respected colleague whose parents came to the US from El Salvador when she was a child had to resign because she was not allowed to renew her work permit. This wonderful woman put herself through college, earned her master’s degree working two jobs, was on tract for a promotion, and is now selling empanadas to make ends meet because she’s being denied a work permit. She was amazing asset and her absence has been felt by so many people.
I realize that there needs to be some immigration reform but this administration’s approach is deplorable. Every day I read about some family being ripped apart and my heart breaks. What has become of this once great country born of immigrants?
39
Teri, these immigrants are illegal. And that makes all the difference.
11
The only laws that can be enforced gracefully are those which are just and correspond to reality. We have been exploiting the poorer countries in the world for a long time, taking their natural resources and labor. We bring it all here and then try to shut the door on them, talking about "laws." It doesn't work. Anyone who doesn't know this doesn't read, is willfully blind, or simply greedy.
256
Firstly, nobody "took" anything from anyone or country. Defending our borders and deciding who comes here is a primary function of any government. Just because past administrations didn't enforce the law doesn't mean we should keep doing it. That's crazy. The rule of law is what makes us exceptional we need to faithfully execute them.
21
Your first sentence is untrue.
10
Your ignoring that ICE is not using a legally valid detainor. They have been using a letter of sorts that carries no legal power to enforce. It is ICE in the wrong, the courts have said so already. Trump and his lunatic fringe supporters are zealously racist to the point they do not want to respect the laws of this country. Power Corrupts and trump is corrupt.
6
This is the same Republican Party that claims Federalist credentials but was more than willing to abrogate the constitution in Bush v Gore and allowed its lawyers to misinterpret the 2nd amendment so as to take gun control away from the States.
282
Come on! The Democratic Florida Supreme Court is the one that flouted the Constitution in that event. They showed their bias by interfering with the Repulican Congress rules on elections which were put in place according to the Constitution. I voted for Gore but I still try to view the Bush victory as legitimate. Frankly, Bill Clinton could have helped more to put Gore over the top.
1
The Republican Party did not decide Bush v. Gore -- that was SCOTUS, which has plenty of liberal Justices.
SCOTUS also decided Heller in 2008.
Do you not recognize the balance of powers in government, or that SCOTUS is THE FINAL WORD on legal matters?
2
5-4 with 2 of the 5 being Nominees of Bush Sr.
The Dred Scott decision and the Fugitive Slave Act demanded that (Northern) state officials likewise comply with Federal demands regarding criminals illegally in residence. This led directly to the rise of the Republican Party and the Civil War. Be careful what you wish for, Jefferson Beauregard Sessions.
40
We are long (14 months) overdue to rid ourselves of this administration that is destroying our economy, making a mockery of the Constitution, and reversing our inclusionary tradition. DRAIN THE SWAMP!
19
Yes, if you are referring to CA's admin.....they all have to go. Nov can't get here quick enough.
15
Time for secession! Without our taxes Trump would be dead in the water, and all Californians will have the kind of life every decent human deserves.
23
I’m with you Barry.
4
You're funny. California is bankrupt. You couldn't afford to fight wildfires or recover from natural disasters. Your gas prices are among the highest in the country. Your education system is pathetic. Without federal funding of your counties cities and state departments, or without the money pumped in by the military bases, Not to mention all the funding that goes into the universities and colleges through the federal student financial aid system would be withdrawn immediately. And you have the highest homeless populations in the country. California would collapse into chaos within six months. yeah keep spouting those socialist delusions.
6
Bankrupt?
https://www.wsj.com/articles/jerry-browns-legacy-a-6-1-billion-budget-su...
3
You can always count on the GOP to be steadfast in their vacillation! Unshakable in their state of flux! Consistently erratic! And a veritable bedrock of duplicity! "GO! GO! GO! (Whatever suits us at the moment)!"
In all honesty though, there is nothing more staunch, trustworthy, and reliable as Republicans strict and unwavering adherence to moral bankruptcy.
14
California has no need at all to be part of the United States as do most Blue states. There is no benefit to being continually ripped off by the red states - and supporting vast populations in those states who can not support themselves.
112
Oh, I think a lot of the red states could do just fine. The whole oil thing.
But that's the nice thing about being the United States. No state is going anywhere. We settled that issue on May 09, 1865.
10
California and New York, we're in this together and, sessions and trump, you have picked the wrong adversaries. Because of our immigrants from hundreds of countries, we are stronger than you. They bring us invention, diverse cultures, industriousness. And we two states are the economic drivers of this nation. Leave us alone! We will never back down nor succumb to your strong-arm threats.
62
What are you going to do?
4
Speak for yourself. I support Trump.
6
Cca: that is what the Southern states said in 1861.
How'd that turn out?
3
California accounts for approximately 14% of the U.S. GNP and 12% of its tax revenues. They ought to threaten to secede from the union.
49
and how much of that is due to federally funded programs and aid? about one third.
8
That's because it's a populous state. Per capita, the CA contribution is not even in the top 15 states.
11
Chad
The Little Supremacist Book of
Preposterous Facts is not generally considered a reliable reference.
You may want to expand your reading list.
4
The Trump administration will lose each and every one of these cases in court, because the precedent has long been established that state and local law enforcement cannot be forced to do the bidding of federal law enforcement. Sessions is just wasting more taxpayer money.
645
Sorry to inform you of this. Federal laws trump state laws. States can get away with passing laws that conflict if the Feds choose to let them. Federal laws may be further regulated by state laws, but they may not conflict or interfere with the enforcement of federal laws. The federal government has standing to sue because two of these state laws directly conflict and interfere.
6
David is right. The question isn't about whether deportation can be carried out in California (it can), but rather about whether federal officials can deputize state resources to deport people. As David pointed out, precedent on this issue is fairly clear.
There's a separate note here about "voluntary cooperation," but that's also well within California's ability to regulate. Corporations cannot voluntarily divulge certain personnel records; they can only do so with a court order. I don't think the Sessions suit challenges this provision, but it's an example of how states do have considerable influence in this area.
12
But it gives Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III something to do, to fulfill his hatred of immigrants. and save himself from being FIRED.
His middle name was given to him in the hope he would do something beneficial for the country, have an open mind. Beauregard is French for "Respected; regarded highly." How he has demeaned the very essence of the named bestowed upon him by his parents. DISGRACEFUL!
4
We need responsible immigration reform. But why do you continue to use the term undocumented immigrants? The correct term is illegal immigrant. The right word to use is illegal simply because they're illegally in the USA. I know progressives want to stop others from using the term illegal immigrant, often invoking the idea that no human being is illegal, but that's nonsense. The term is accurate. It's not a semantic discussion. I think, when the left hears illegal, they decided, well, let's just change the word & we'll be done with it. Is there something about illegal immigrant per se that is so dehumanizing that it can't be used in polite discourse for people who are trying to have an honest conversation & aren't trying to spin it?
We need to speak clearly so we define what's at stake. Undocumented seems to imply that some people forgot to fill out the correct paper work when crossing the border. That's not what happened. They entered the U.S. knowing they were breaking the law. They're here in the U.S illegally. That's why it's an issue. Can the left admit that the large number of illegal immigrants in the US, many of whom are relatively unskilled, gives rise to economic competition that harms job & wage prospects for voters who live here? Can they admit that one can have concerns about illegal immigration without being racist? That there may be a rational reason for being wary of a lax approach to this problem? If these questions aren't answered we can't solve this issue.
91
How do you know your breaking the law if your 2 months old, 2 years old, 8 years old??? You are correct we need real immigration reform, but we also need to do the right thing by people who were brought to the US by their parents. Get over the wording illegal the use of the word doesn't matter, what matters is how can you or anyone want to send 10's of thousands of people back to their countries if all they know is America...Let's get real!!
4
There was a great proposal put on the table....More than was expected...and what did the liberals do??? Walked. Now DACA people are protesting the Dem Party for using and betraying them. Now that is real!
5
Bill
You say "...economic competition that harms job & wage prospects for voters who live here", as you have been taught to do.
The problem is that there is a mad search on for employees. There are not enough Real Americans applying for jobs, and employers are desperate.
So, you're wrong.
2
Jeff Sessions wants to run the Just Us Department and take the country back to those wonderful days of yore when even the worst white man was superior to all people of color, and women stayed in their place. Because really? Doesn’t the entire country need to be more like Alabama?
26
Opening lyrics to the Stars Fell on Alabama
"We lived our little drama
We kissed in a field of white
And stars fell on Alabama
Last night..."
1
They have raised taxes on blue states, and now are denying them "states' rights" to their own laws. Will the Trump administration start a civil war?
13
FINALLY. It's time to go even further: start ARRESTING California politicians who thwart federal immigration law or refuse to help them in any way. Whether it is Gov. Moonbeam Brown all the way down to Oakland Mayor Schaaf, arrest & make a public example out of them.
51
Sure, let's listen to Southern voters--you won't be happy until our country is a third world nation. Stay in Arkansa.
8
Meanwhile, in the beautiful state of Arkansas, residents continue enjoying federal government welfare, paid for by... Yes, the Blue states, like California! I really hope Trump and his racist Attorney General keep pushing, so we can start a secession movement. We don't need the rest of the country, but the deplorable red states sure need us.
5
Right wing crazy on full display. Even our last republican governor thinks Trump is a terrible President and person. I am betting it was Trump who put Sessions up to this, Trump doesn't knw the law. Refund the tax revenue we send you guys. Live off your own efforts for a change.
10
It's official ... We are at war with ourselves.
7
It's more accurate to say that we're targeting unlawfully present foreign nationals for repatriation. Calling that a "war" is a bit melodramatic, no?
25
Mueller must be getting close.
"Let's sue California and make illegals be the main news topic. My supporters in Mississippi will love it."
California will be fine.
23
"These politicians can’t make these decisions and be held unaccountable for people dying."? Dying? What a farce! Immigrants - both legal and illegal are far more law abiding than "native sons". And that's an undeniable fact.
This level of sustained lying stupidity in service of retrograde ends can only be the product of assiduous cultivation. Real Americans find this truly scandalous and shameful.
16
More GOP hypocrisy on state's rights. And, another example of Trump's aspirations of becoming a dictator and autocrat.
22
No person, no entity is above the law. Federal law takes precedence over state and local law. The question as to which is supreme was settled violently in 1865; and subsequently, with occasional violence, the principle was enforced and upheld during the Civil Rights era when racist segregation laws of the southern states were overturned.
18
Americans want a sense that laws matter on immigration. The idea that laws are openly flaunted is anathema to them. Meanwhile, democrats are moving in the opposite direction of many of their constituents. They're just plain wrong on this issue.
33
Arrest people who buy medications from Canada.
3
We are not challenging immigration laws in California, we're simply refusing to assist ICE in its racially focused round ups.
10
Interesting that Trump and Sessions are considered the "hard liners". California appears to have taken the hard line here not only refusing to enforce immigration laws but impeding those whose job it is to enforce them.
40
States are not required to enforce federal laws, and they are not impeding anyone from enforcing any law, as long as that enforcement is undertaken lawfully.
9
It is not California's responsibility to enforce immigration laws.
7
We are a nation of laws and federal law supersedes state law in relation to immigration. The federal laws need to be changed to protect dreamers but preventing state and local law enforcement from contacting federal law enforcement for federal crimes is extremely troublesome and dangerous. We could end up seeing some southern states harboring/protecting those who perpetrate federal crimes in California for example violations real automatic weapons, federal voting rights laws and California claim the right to pick and choose enforcement seems like the wrong course of action.
13
Will Session's action be met by a successful 10th Amendment defense? Ironically, see Scalia's majority opinion in Printz v. U.S. These hard right conservatives love states rights and federalism, only when they hypocritically decide that they don't!
9
An equally compelling can be made for Democratic inconsistency. Obama DOJ disregarded laws and enforced this stance on the states. 10th amendment is basically a dead letter under the Left, until they don't make all the rules and get o decide which ones to obey.
5
I looked it up. Thank you. How interesting. Could someone who is literate in law further comment?
We don't need ICE in California if they're going to terrorize our communities. Every country has the right to regulate immigration, but business owners had a field day hiring illegal immigrants for next to nothing. They've been hard, honest workers who want life and liberty. We should welcome those who have settled here and follow the Naturalization Act of 1790. The act created a uniform rule of naturalization and a residency requirement for new citizenship applicants. The law required immigrants to live in the United States for two years and their respective state of residence for one year prior to applying for citizenship. We can't let the Statue of Liberty weep.
10
"follow the Naturalization Act of 1790"
Um - times and conditions have changed a little since then.
8
This is a disgusting act by the so-called president and his lackey Sessions. This is a land of immigrants. If not deport Melania and her parents immediately.
73
Indeed deport them, especially her parents, who appear to be living in our White House on our taxpayer dime.
4
Not a Trump fan. But illegal is illegal.
49
Yes, finally the Federal Government take a stand against these outlaw states.
If the states don't like Federal Constitutional law, then legally pursue a change, but to take law into their own hands is mob mentality that subverts this nation and creates anarchy and chaos.
188
Immigration is a federal concern, outside the purview of the states. Federal law stipulates how state and local law enforcement agencies must cooperate with federal immigration authorities.
The California Values Act recognizes these stipulations. What it and other sanctuary legislation does is restrict cooperation to just what is required by law.
The federal immigration agents issue warrant-less immigrant detainers that federal courts have found unconstitutional. Very many state and local governments do not honor these pieces of paper, now including California.
You are right that someone is trying to take the law into their own hands, but your ire is misdirected. It is the federal government in this case, not California.
28
Federalism also means that states have rights their own laws. Californians didn’t “take law into their own hands.” The state passed a law according to its Constitution. There is nothing outlaw about it. Nebraska does it the same way, I am sure, in its state legislature.
I am completely fine with SCOTUS reviewing the constitutionality of a state law, but your calling a state statute “mob mentality” is disingenuous and very antifederalist, in fact. You don’t like California, you don’t like its politics, fine. It doesn’t make it an outlaw state. Stay in Nebraska and we’ll all just get along.
19
The outlaw states should secede -
2
The Supreme Court is still very much dominated by progressives. This lawsuit doesn't have a chance!
4
The Supreme Court is dominated by progressives? You've got to be joking.
16
Republicans are in favor of states rights, until there's a republican led federal government. States rights seem to have gone the way of fiscal conservatism and family values. Trump is a fraud.
75
It's about time Trump and the AG get serious about illegal immigration and start jailing those that defy our laws like the mayor of Oakland.
42
good idea - also put in jail all the rich white people who hire the "illegals" at bargain wages.
24
It is about time that Trump supporters realize that state's rights issues don't just apply to land use but also involve fundamental issues of civil rights, due process and the unimpeachable right to defy and challenge federal overreach.
8
This is another Trumpian ploy to whip up his base of racists and Evangelists who all hate California. Trump learned from his mentor Roy Cohn, Joe McCarthy's right hand man, how to deal with those who oppose and don't go along with you: Attack, Atttack and then Attack again. How long are the citizens of the United States going to allow the ignorant Trump divide our nation in pursuit of his sick version of glory?
100
US population has increased by 85 million or about 35% since the last Immigration Bill in 1986. Population growth within California has been more severe than in the country as a whole.
Such population growth is unsustainable in the long run.
Here's a brief description of how it affects California's 2018-19 State Budget:
K12 $55 billion
Health Services $37 billion
University system $15 billion
Corrections $12 billion
Population growth means more money must be spent on K12. That leaves less for university education. Over time this has resulted in higher tuition. Fewer students can afford to finish the university and go to medical school. The number of new doctors trained does not keep up with population growth. The result is fewer doctors and shortages of medical care, as well as higher premiums for insurance.
Resources are not unlimited. California cannot continue growing in population. So we need an end to illegal immigration and a lower birthrate to offset whatever level of immigration we allow.
Trump has used some divisive rhetoric. We need to treat immigrants with respect. But we also need to be firm about upholding our laws.
1. Dreamers need to be provided renewable options for staying, but no citizenship.
2. Families should be reunited, but as many in Mexico as in the US.
3. We need an e-verify program with teeth.
4. Latin American countries need to provide family planning to qualify for trade with the US.
5. The US needs a one-child policy.
22
Population growth is fueled by organized religion, each of which want more followers to increase their power. True of Catholics, Mormons, Muslims, etc etc. The only problem is, the earth is not infinite. If you cared about overpopulation, you would be AGAINST the Bible, whose "go forth and multiply" will cause untold suffering in the form of famine, plague, and war, all of which will be blamed on mankind or man's moral weakness, when it is really precipitated by crowding. What a cruel situation for the masses.
4
I won't comment on all your suggestions; however some voice of reason must tell you that a one-child policy would be a terrible idea for the U.S.. Look at Japan: not enough young people.
1
Your entire screed is undermined by one simple fact: CA is now running a budget surplus of about $7m with healthy cash reserves. This is what happens when fiscally responsible progressive policies are coupled with sensible taxes, instead of the kind of reckless and feckless cut and spend nonsense passed by the GOP in DC.
7
Sanctuary laws sound bad, but they serve a real purpose: allowing immigrant communities to interact with law enforcement and report crime in their neighborhoods without fear of deportation or detainment, thus making those communities and surrounding areas safer for everyone. But, of course, Trump doesn't get this nuance, as he and his base simply want all brown and black deported. Another example of heavy-handed and light-headed thinking from the GOP.
30
ICE is a law enforcement agency too and is very interested in interacting with "immigrant" communities.
14
Our country needs immigration in order to prosper; Trump needs blaming minorities and newcomers to keep his base loyal and angry. Once again our President puts his own needs ahead of the people he was elected to serve.
574
Not unlike how democrats need immigrants and rile up their angry leftwing by stoking anger at Trump for enforcing law.
10
Trump is enforcing The Law? Not by a long shot. This administration's approach to law enforcement is NIMBY.
1
Trump is circling the drain, he needs Mueller off the front page so he sends Session s on another mission that can't win. Like the steel tariffs, trump is a looser married to an immigrant, and she is no Einstein.
4
"Unjust" and "unfair" to whom?
12
they should stop going after all those 7 11 clerks and nail salon workers. Mayor Schaff has done a service for all mayors across the country.
these 3 laws are the result of California lawyers knowing about the law instead of the land with regards to immigration. the justice department knows how to work for a small vocal minority that wants to make america white again.
the most conservative leaning counties here all rely on many workers to harvest the crops.
SAD behavior on the part of the justice dept. as for the boss situation normal. SAD beyond CAPS
22
Under Trump and Sessions, the Justice Department has become the "Justice Department"--its own oxymoron.
I can't wait for Mueller to link the dots to Trump Crime Family treason, and GOP collaboration.
22
Bring it on, Jeff Beauregard Sessions! California is ready to fight white supremacy tooth and nail. While states' rights is what has kept millions of Americans from having equal access to everything from education, voting, health, civil rights and even human rights, it is the same "right" that has allowed so many states to engage in the most blatant acts of discrimination and human rights abuses, legally.
It's time Americans take stock of the history of states' rights and how they've been used since the end of the Civil War. Trump may be the worst president we've had and he certainly is upholding the worst of American traditions, but the silver lining is that if we focus on what's important, his (hopefully) short administration will light a path to true reconstruction.
---
https://www.rimaregas.com/?s=states%27+rights
64
Rather ironic that a liberal state such as California would use the principle of states' rights to assert the supremacy of state law over federal law.
14
It is ironic. Hopefully, voters will see it.
2
And now we have proof Trump is a liberal.
When does civil war commence? What happened to the Republicans belief in states rights? Trump and crew have permanently checked into crazy town.
27
Beauregard Sessions might want to study the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 and what it led to. He might also reflect on the concept of “states’ rights”.
34
The great state of California leads the way! GO, GO Jerry Brown!! Show this mess in Washington that passes for government, how it's done. I'm glad, proud and grateful to say I live in California.
216
There is no end to the insanity coming out of htis White House.
25
Democrats believe in nullification now?
12
Looks like someone's trying, and failing, to use bigotry for their base to get ahead of a lawsuit over their contractual blunder...that's right, folks, Stormy's suing "covfefe" and says their hush agreement was null all along because he never even signed the NDA contract with his usual seismometer reading!
It's another day for stocks—particularly popcorn, nom nom.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2018/03/06/1ad8e60a-21a7-1...
12
What federal law requires California law enforcement to report the release of a prisoner to the Fed before release? If there is no law requiring them to do so, how can the DOJ say they are in violation of the Constitution?
37
Without immigrants California will cease to function. Most particularly, the crops will rot in the fields and on the trees. What can be harvested will cost a fortune. What are already struggling people in the midwest going to do when an orange at the their local market costs more than $2? Maybe they can come to California and pick fruit for $35 a day. Never before in history have we had such a myopic and authoritarian federal regime that just wants to control everything with no consideration of consequences. Elections later this year and in 2020 cannot arrive fast enough.
283
You do realize that the majority of immigrants in California are legal ones.
16
I doubt it, especially in the service industry here in CA. But please do share any accurate numerical figures if you have them, as well as the published source. Thank you.
5
Who do you think does this work outside of the illegal immigrant conclaves of California, Texas, Florida, and New York? Citizens. And it may come as a surprise to you, but they're white.
14
I am generally liberal and despise the Trump administration. But I think that the Democrats/liberals are hobbling many mainstream issues by embracing too many fringe issues. I personally believe that the very large illegal immigrant population in the US today exists because powerful economic forces (businesses that employ lower-wage/skill workers) have made substantial profits by paying tax-evading salaries and leaving the tax-payer to account for the needed services. They are 'illegal' wink-wink and should NOT BE TREATED AS CRIMINALS (except individuals that are). But for me the solution is to penalize the EMPLOYER: they, not the worker, are the beneficiary of the scam. So if the feds want to step up accountability in employment, go for it! They just should then penalize the employer for all that tax revenue they evaded. As for reporting about arrests (California Values Act), it's just an expensive and onerous reporting responsibility tacked on to local government to save the federal government effort: Uncle Sam wants a list of all detainees without citizen status: hey, that's YOUR gig, come down to City Hall, make a list of everyone arrested, and run against your records...no local laws differentiate based on US immigration status, just on what the suspect did.
72
This is not a fringe issue. What the government does to immigrants, people of color, and women they will do to "regular people." Just ask Japanese Americans. When we Democrats stand up for immigrants we are standing up for everyone else too. We say, "Look what you are doing to these people, government. Don't you know that it will happen to you too if you wait long enough?
12
OH HOGWASH!
Illegal immigrants have broken the law
Suppose you want 'amnesty' for bank robbers & drug dealers & other criminals as well
You comment is nothing but wild hysteria
6
AnnS
Wild hysteria is comparing undocumented aliens to bank robbers and drug dealers.
4
California benefits hugely from immigrants. But California has a combination of modern tech industries and agriculture. The midwest and south has little of these, and immigrants are a threat to Americans who cannot even make it through junior college. So Trump exaggerates to please his base. Yet very few people die at the hands of immigrant criminals, compared to the number who die at the hands of American criminals. Same thing with terrorists. The non-educated American workers of the midwest and south should be FAR more afraid of the machines, because automation is taking FAR more of your jobs than immigrants. Soon there will be no driving or delivery jobs, all autonomous driving vehicles. Are you going to blame that on the immigrants?
138
Witnessing a personality disorder on the scale of an entire population, aka the Fox news audience, one realizes they will never not feel victimized no matter what polices are enacted.
5
I'm sure they already blame those Indians at the tech support call centers for those self-drivers, when they should really blame stingy employers, or the usual advancement of technology from Horses And Bayonets to These Things Called Aircraft Carriers (thanks, Obama!).
Instead of Took-Our-Jobs bigotry, maybe the displaced worker should get ready for post-full-employment USA, and demand universal basic income and free tuition to ensure the many whose services are no longer needed won't also become those who are no longer fed or learned.
Besides, the "covfefe" GOP loves the Poorly Educated—more forced births for their election districts.
4
Progressives, great at false equivalencies.
2
Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III may have found a way to get back into the toxic graces of the Trumpster.
8
the federal government cannot force states to act as deputies in enforcing federal laws. in the enforcement of civil rights, a stronger federal law will force a state to abide by that expansion of rights. with taxes, states must have mechanisms in place for collection of federal taxes. but with immigration, the determination of whether a person really is a citizen, green card holder, a student with visa, undocumented, and/or subject to deportation, can ONLY be made by the feds. the states can try to collect that information, but its only what the subject tells them, and may not be true. the states cannot make decisions based on a persons presumed immigration status that could affect their ability to dwell peacefully in that state. the feds can issue warrants or subpeonas for individuals they believe are undocumented, and if the issuance is orderly, the state must ALLOW the serving of the warrant. they dont have to enforce it. in fact, they cannot enforce it. they are taking the side of the feds in a matter that has not yet been decided in a court of law. the state MUST remain neutral on this. california is correct, and if there is justice, they will win this case. its not about "wanting more immigrants" vs "get them out". its about rule of law and respect for the constitution.
11
No Gene. It’s time for people of good will all over the country to work together to stand up for the human rights of every person in this country, including undocumented immigrants. Defending human rights is not a red or blue value; it’s an American value.
15
Adherence to the principle that federal law supersedes state and local law is also an American value.
9
In this case, the federal law does not obligate or require states to cooperate with the federal immigration law enforcement authorities.
For this a new law would need to be passed by the federal legislature FORCING the states to cooperate with the federal law enforcement authorities. What are the chances of such laws being passed? I would guess zero?
2
Richard ... can a state legitimately pass a law requiring employers to refuse cooperation to federal authorities upon penalty of fine with the purpose of shielding illegal immigrants from federal immigration law? Can a sate pass a law protecting me from federal IRS law?
4
This is long overdue. California cannot subvert federal law and enact it's own immigration policies.
37
California has not subverted any federal laws or enacted its own immigration policies. Current federal laws concerning immigration neither obligates nor requires any state or local governments to cooperate with federal immigration officers. It is strictly on a courtesy basis.
California does not control its borders with Mexico and thus it has no power over immigration policies.
4
CALEXIT! When traveling abroad I'm embarrassed to be an American now, when asked where I'm from, I say CALIFORNIA and they light up. At least I still have my progressive, liberal, diverse, beautiful state to be proud of!
193
Remember when we used to laugh when Texans, et al took a similar approach during the Obama years? Now California has become the national clown.
12
NO CALIFORNIA, DONT LEAVE US! We need all the help we can get...
2
When you’re traveling abroad do you take your passport and get the necessary visas before you go? Have you ever overstayed a visa? If so, what was the consequence?
If the federal government can sue my state” representatives, can I sue Republicans in congress for dereliction of duty starting with Mitch McConnell and Chuck “pull the plug on grandma” Grassley for refusing to hold hearings on Garland for the Supreme Court? Can I also sue Trump for doing nothing to protect us from the Russian attacks on our elections?
168
You certainly can. I thought about doing this too! The problem is that you would have to prove that they're not doing their job, oh and you need the time and money. The best thing to do is talk to your representative and vote.
4
A great class-action lawsuit in the making!
1
How about it, Xavier Bacerra?
How are immigration authorities supposed to verify that workers not using fake social security numbers and that businesses are not hiring people not authorized to work in the U.S. if CA state law "prohibits local businesses from allowing immigraiton to access employee records without a court order or subpoena"? I agree with the Justice Dept. on this. The federal government makes immigration law, not states. The federal government struck down Arizona's laws relating to illegal immigration. This is no different.
15
The Trump Injustice Department has about a .150 successful batting average with their lawsuits.
Looking forward to watching that batting average plummet as their Make America White Again campaign flails and disgraces the idea, spirit and good name of America.
165
It's bigotry turned against Blues
And skin color of non-white hues,
A POTUS so boast-al
Hugely anti-Coastal,
An action that's breeding bad news.
47
Isn't it ironic that the President is a native New Yorker?
3
Thank you, sir. I couldn't have said, or rhymed, it better. This guy has to stick it to my state as much as and as often as he can. But you know, it is rather like a compliment to me and my fellow Californians. I would certainly worry as to what we are doing wrong as a community if Trump embraced us. Perish the thought!
4
We, The People of These United States:
Assert our US Constitutional obligation to impeach the current Executive Branch lead and Administration
124
California responds: "bring it on."
286
That's a very strange analogy. It seems to me that Trump and Sessions are more akin to Bush in this case.
1
Hear hear! I have never been more proud to be a Californian.
3
Well this will be interesting to watch how the courts hold on the constitutional limits of power of states visa vis federal government. SC will clearly favor the federal government voting on party lines but then the case has to travel up to them through several months of litigation.
2
I no longer recognize this nation I’ve been living in for 73 years.
Trump is at “war” with almost everyone. The Treasury is being given to the rich and the corporations. Roads are decaying. And now they’re going to war with States?
The Civil War started when some States tried to leave the Union. But this uncivil war is coming directly from the White House. Those of us who disagree with its policies, including entire states, are being targeted.
What do you call a nation at war with its own citizens? Certainly not United!
966
"What do you call a nation at war with its own citizens?"
Undocumented aliens are not US citizens by any stretch of the imagination.
34
It is not the undocumented who are being sued by the US Judiciary. The nation is suing one of its states; The People are suing The People.
12
Vote! And get everyone you know – and even some people you don't know – to vote!
10
I never thought there would be political prisoners in the United States in the 21st century, but Trumplicans seem determined to impose their heinous agenda on everyone. Moderate Republicans are terrified to speak out against these unconscionable policies. Vote blue everywhere!
259
We in California look forward to defending our values that this Administration has clearly forsaken.
Of significant concern is the threat made by the acting director of ICE that the state should expect to see “a lot more deportation officers” and that elected officials who support the policy should be arrested. “We’ve got to start charging some of these politicians with crimes,” he said. “These politicians can’t make these decisions and be held unaccountable for people dying. I mean, we need to hold these politicians accountable for their actions.”
Charging politicians with crimes? Really? That would be a very dangerous precedent for violations of civil law. Especially for this Administration. Can we then prosecute Pruitt and Zinke for environmental crimes? Ross and Cohn and McConnell and Ryan for economic crimes? The Republican Congress for not abiding their constitutional duties?
I've heard ICE officials on the radio, and they truly sound like a bunch of psychos. They claim to only go after dangerous felons, but somehow always round up a bunch of law-abiding families instead.
Nice people under this Administration. This is one of the things we're so miserable about, in case anyone still has any doubt (Kellyanne Conway excepted, of course).
227
Bassman: you know nothing of what you say. Go read the Constitution concerning states rights.
The Federal Government is supreme in this matter.
13
here, here!
4
One cannot be law-abiding (as you so eloquently put it) if they are breaking the law by being in this country illegally.
14
Interesting. Kind of like how Obama’s DoJ sued the state of Arizona when officials there decided to use state resources to enforce federal immigration laws that federal law enforcement agencies were instructed to ignore. It’s a slippery slope, isn’t it?
23
That's funny that you didn't include the language of the law in your post. The law allowed local and state law enforcement to stop anyone that didn't appear to be a US citizen and check their ID. It's against the law to detain anyone without a reason. It's a real slippery slope for sure.
11
A simple Google search would show you that over a million people legally immigrate to the US each year. In fact, there's never been more legal immigrants in the US than right now. Despite what some would have you believe, there's nothing wrong with our immigration system. The only thing ‘wrong’ are those in places like California openly flouting the law.
61
Well, I guess we will see you in court.
5
Two wrongs do not make a right.
1
It’s time for Calexit.
134
Good luck with the water situation when you don't depend on Colorado.
11
I like the map with the two coasts and the northern states merging with Canada. Let the red states go their own way.
6
@Momo, let the east coast join you, starting with the first grand Mass Exit.
5
Why doesn't the Justice department go after real problems like big pharma's role in the opioid epidemic, or the subversion of our democracy by a hostile foreign country through American puppets, instead of this make-believe problem that people from other countries are causing us dire harm.
349
Why? Because hate is the great energizer. Whips up the base.
10
Or the president who is tearing our democracy apart piece by piece, and is probably criminally accountable to boot!
8
Every authoritarian needs a good scapegoat.
Trump sure does seem to be doing Putin's work in dividing and destroying our country.
2
Republicans are so strongly for states' rights ... except, of course, when those rights get in the way of their cruel authoritarian policies. Is this the kind of tyranny the drafters of the Second Amendment had in mind? Or were they only thinking of high-school shooters?
424
One might as readily argue that the Left embraces centralized control, and making the 10th amendment a dead letter - except when it doesn't. You may have some grounds for your views, but you don't have any principles Constitutional argument.
11
So, where was the demoncratic support for state's rights when they forced gay marriage on all the states that did not want it? Is that the kind of tyranny demoncrats have in mind?
8
Except for the fact that there is no inconsistency or tyranny here. Here are some points where you're mistaken:
1) Certain things such as defense, foreign policy, and immigration are handled at a federal level. They are simply not states issues. So what you're saying about there being any inconsistency in Republican views on the subject is bogus. Immigration being handled at a state level wouldn't work unless you took away freedom of movement between states.
2) They are not rounding up legal immigrants, no matter how much you jump up and down. They are simply enforcing law. Your objections are moral, not legal. That is the reason why California ultimately is helpless when ICE agents come in and deport 180 of them - because ICE legally has that authority. Your argument is not a legal argument -- it is purely based on empathy.
7
Time for the blue states to split from the Red Welfare taker states.
325
Please do...
3
super idea gene. please work on this asap
2
Go for it. That would be a large scale replication of Catalonia trying to leave Spain, or countless other "spllts" being attempted in the world. One could characterize it as stamping your feet and picking up your toys to go home - wherever that is. Building a nation requires character, not childish tantrums.
8