Excuses NOT to act against SB54 Sanctuary State

.... and Rebuttals

 

 

By George Miller, April 25, 2018

Background

The state of California is illegally harboring millions of illegal aliens. We don’t even know the exact number, because most don’t self-report and California is not collecting and publishing statistics. The illegal, unconstitutional SB54 Sanctuary State “law,” officially known as the “Values Act,” is the state’s latest vehicle for helping to enable harboring illegal aliens.

Pro-Sanctuary City people show the flag and speak at an Oxnard City Council meeting in March, 2017. Photo: Dan Pinedo/CitizensJournal.us

California, which is believed to have the largest number of illegal immigrants in the nation, has a de facto open borders policy. In many cases, it virtually ignores illegal alien status. 

California elected representatives have for decades signaled, to would-be illegal aliens, that U.S. immigration laws do not apply in the state. In fact, the state provides cover for foreigners illegally in the state, the employers that hire them illegally and dishonestly, and the corrupt political establishment, which relies on massive number of illegal aliens to distort census counts and dilute Congressional representation. California rewards illegal aliens with taxpayer-funded services, such as: 

  • Exceptions to laws that actual Citizens must adhere to
  • Free or heavily subsidized medical care, in some cases
  • Subsidized housing (only one family member needs to be a legal resident)
  • Free K-12 schooling
  • Cheap college education
  • Free food
  • Access to drivers licenses and other state and local identity cards that lend credibility and access to services.
  • No prosecution for working illegally, little attempt to even prevent it
  • Shielding from most arrests and prosecution as illegal immigrants
  • Immunity from prosecution for not paying CA taxes
  • Laughably low barriers to voting

The societal burden is increased when one considers that many illegals have offspring, too.

Statutes and policies combine to do all this. In the last couple of years, the state and municipalities have cooperated less and less with federal authorities, to identify, arrest, hold and inform/turn over jail inmates to federal authorities for arrest, prosecution and/or deportation proceedings. 

Some governmental bodies are stonewalling SB54/illegal immigration protesters, virtually ignoring them, or spewing a few of the excuses presented below to forestall proper opposition.

 

Pushback

In recent weeks, dozens of California cities and several counties have staged a full scale rebellion against the rebellion of California’s unconstitutional, dangerous and expensive SB54 “law” by repudiating it in one form or another. Some have merely condemned it in resolutions. Some are cooperating in federal lawsuits against California or joining other cities’ litigation. A few even intend to halt compliance, risking the wrath of sanctuary supporters such as Attorney-General Becerra and Governor Jerry Brown, who have threatened to actually arrest officials resisting them.

Dozens of cities and more on the way sounds like a lot, but not when you consider that California has hundreds of cities and 55 counties. That means that most are doing nothing. So, why is that? Some are merely afraid to act against the power of the state and have seen little concrete action by the federal government to bring the state in line with federal constitutional law. Others merely accept the status quo, believing that they can safely ignore activists demanding that they repudiate sanctuary cities. Thousand Oaks is a fine example of this. They have mostly ignored letters, emails, calls and speakers demanding action. But this week some (definitely not all) council members seemed engaged when dozens of SB54 opponents showed up at a council meeting eloquently and angrily demanding that the council act to fight SB54. We have discerned a pattern of how some legislative bodies attempt to avoid action to squelch illegal and unconstitutional sanctuary state/county/city policies ….

 

Shameful morally and legally bankrupt excuses

Politically correct or  cowardly city councils and county boards of supervisors, city managers, county executives, their counsel, as well as most mainstream media, radical NGO’s and left wing politicians  have developed a repertoire of excuses for not acting against illegal sanctuary policies.

Partial list of excuses and debunking

  1. It’s a federal issue

Thanks for admitting it’s a federal issue. Immigration law is definitely a federal function. Then, doesn’t that mean that states and municipalities shouldn’t be interfering with it? Yet, they do. Instead, they should be enforcing it, or at least cooperating with federal authorities rather than illegally sabotaging them. It is legitimate for municipalities and states to speak up for and enforce legitimate constitutional law and denounce forces attempting to thwart it.

  1. We must enforce state/local “law.” States rights/Tenth Amendment allow this.

Not if they’re unconstitutional and contravene constitutional federal law. In fact it’s officials’ oath-bound duty to actively fight unconstitutional “laws” and actions, not hide behind them.

  1. Illegal immigration is not a crime

Really? What did you just say? ILLEGAL immigration is not a crime? Some immigration violations fall under criminal statutes in US8 immigration law. Some are civil infractions. All are illegal.

  1. SB54/open borders is “humanitarian”

It’s not really “humanitarian” to fail to screen out criminal, unsuitable entrants. It’s not humanitarian to flout our laws which were passed for good reasons, to put a strain on our resources, depriving legal Citizens and residents of them and increasing the tax and debt load in the most heavily debt-ridden country in the world, which already accepts more legal immigrants than most of the world combined. Surveys have shown that 80% of the world’s inhabitants in multiple country surveys would like to come here. We can’t accommodate even a fraction of those, especially if it includes many criminals or non-net contributors to society. Our first responsibility is to take care of our own people. It’s far more humanitarian to make improvements in their home countries.

  1. We have to protect “immigrants”

Legal immigrants are already protected by the law. It’s illegal immigrants we need to address, especially criminal illegal immigrants. SB 54 is not about “immigrants.” It’s not even about illegal aliens. It’s about criminal illegal aliens’ status and rights. Conflating the terms “immigrants” with “illegal immigrants” and “criminal illegal aliens” is a sloppy semantic trick used by the open borders crowd to confuse things.

  1. SB 54 does not protect violent criminals

The hell it doesn’t. Numerous crimes do not appear in the SB54 exceptions. In addition, suspects and indictees may be freed if they are not actually convicted. But anyway, why wouldn’t all criminals be deported or imprisoned?

  1. People can’t be “illegal”

If they are here illegally, then yes, they are lawbreakers and deserve the label “illegal.”

and my favorite ….

  1. SB54/illegal immigrant opponents are “racist,” “xenophobic”

This is the last ditch, default, backup line for the intellectually bankrupt. Since the 1960’s, immigration policies have been non-discriminatory, although executive actions can temporarily restrict immigration from high risk areas. Multiple Presidents have exercised that option. Enforcing our reasonable immigration laws isn’t “xenophobic” and certainly not “racist” ig enforced consistently

 

On mass deportations

Technically, all illegal aliens are subject to deportation. However there are millions of people in limbo, who were actually encouraged to come here by our corrupt officials and various groups. Then there are their millions of U.S. born offspring, who have been accorded the gift of Citizenship.

Nearly all parties are aware that the focus should be on removing the criminal element first and stopping the torrent of illegal entry, which is the subject for future articles.

Various factions have attempted to arrive at a compromise on the status of those here illegally, but the open borders factions have demanded wide amnesty and other huge concessions. They have not been willing to compromise, so no deal has been forthcoming. Reducing incentives to come or stay here should be a high priority, along with the complete elimination of the criminal element from our nation.

 

Some relevant immigration Law

Tim Stevens thoughtfully provided a brief summary of some applicable immigration law:

I found this summary on Federal #8USC1324a offenses and as I read it (am not a lawyer), politicians (governors, senators, congressmen, assemblymen, mayors, city council members), public employees, elected offices, law enforcement, judges, etc. who author, sign, vote for, fund with taxpayer money, and/or enforce sanctuary city/county/state policies should be charged under multiple subsections including the following which carry fines and prison terms. 

Since they are violating these Federal Laws on a grand scale (millions of illegal aliens), not to mention on public record, I would assume the infraction count # should compound the sentences assuming a legitimate legal system and legitimate DOJ.

Sanctuary City/County/State policies, by definition, are the epitome of Encouraging/Inducing — Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv).

·         Domestic Transporting — Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii)

·         Harboring — Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(iii)

·         Encouraging/Inducing — Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv)

·         Conspiracy/Aiding or Abetting — Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(v)

https://www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-1907-title-8-usc-1324a-offenses

Domestic Transporting — Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii) makes it an offense for any person who — knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, transports, or moves or attempts to transport or move such alien within the United States by means of transportation or otherwise, in furtherance of such violation of law.

Harboring — Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(iii) makes it an offense for any person who — 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.

Encouraging/Inducing — Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv) makes it an offense for any person who — encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law.

Conspiracy/Aiding or Abetting — Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(v) expressly makes it an offense to engage in a conspiracy to commit or aid or abet the commission of the foregoing offenses.

Some of these governmental bodies are stonewalling protesters, virtually ignoring them, or spewing a few of the above excuses to forestall proper action.

 


George Miller is Publisher/Co-Founder of CitizensJournal.us and a “retired” operations management consultant residing in Oxnard.


Get Citizensjournal.us Headlines free  SUBSCRIPTION. Keep us publishing – DONATE

5 Responses to Excuses NOT to act against SB54 Sanctuary State

  1. Bruce Boyer May 23, 2018 at 2:36 pm

    A beyond excellent job sir!

    Reply
  2. Tedd Smith April 26, 2018 at 10:01 am

    Wanted to send you some info I found while at council mtg tues night. Sent it to Rob
    Tedd Smith

    Reply
  3. Mark Savalla April 26, 2018 at 9:38 am

    Great job George, provides a swath of information to combat the communists stance on SB54.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *