So back to the original question… Have ANY public officials in “sanctuary” cities been charged with harboring as a result of their policy? Trump has been in office for over two years. Why not?
An irrelevant dodge to whether or not public officials can be charged with harboring.
What is the test for harboring
Just for the record, the original law [§1324] was amended by Congress in 1952 with Public Law 283, which applied a penalty to shielding and harboring, as well as to the act of smuggling.
In the decision, United States v. Kim, 193 F.3d 567, 574 (2d Cir.1999) the Second Circuit announced the following test for determining what constitutes shielding, concealing, and harboring under 8 U.S.C. § 1324:
“harboring, within the meaning of § 1324, encompasses conduct tending substantially to facilitate an alien’s remaining in the United States illegally and to prevent government authorities from detecting his unlawful presence.”
Public officers in sanctuary cities who engage in the above forbidden activities can, and should be prosecuted for criminal conduct ”…tending substantially to facilitate an alien’s remaining in the United States illegally and to prevent government authorities from detecting his unlawful presence.”
JWK
In every communist dictatorial oppressive country, like Cuba, the people are disarmed. Forewarned is forearmed.
Why has nobody been charged?
Send your question here: 950 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washington, DC 20530
JWK
The Democrat and Republican Leadership have conspired, for 35 years, to keep the border opened, and today’s Bill continues to allow and encourage illegal border crossings.
Amazing how dems only want to enforce the law on legal citizens…
…But these new lines of attack just prove the witch hunt coup failed…
Can city officials in sanctuary cities legally forbid their police officers from sharing information with ICE?
Did you know that city officials who command their police department to not share information with ICE are in violation of the law?
WRITTEN OPINIONIn regard to this fact, let us read Judge Harry D. Leinenweber’s recent dealing with 8 U.S. Code § 1373 - Communication between government agencies and the Immigration and Naturalization Service
“The constitutionality of Section 1373 has been challenged before. The Second Circuit in City of New York v. United States, 179 F.3d 29 (2d Cir. 1999), addressed a facial challenge to Section 1373 in similar circumstances. By executive order, New York City prohibited its employees from voluntarily providing federal immigration authorities with information concerning the immigration status of any alien. Id. at 31-32. The city sued the United States, challenging the constitutionality of Section 1373 under the Tenth Amendment.
Id. at 32.
_The Second Circuit found that Section 1373 did not compel state or local governments to enact or administer any federal regulatory program or conscript local employees into its service, and therefore did not run afoul of the rules gleaned from the Supreme Court’s Printz and New York decisions. City of New York, 179 F.3d at 35. Rather, the court held that Section 1373 prohibits local governmental entities and officials only from directly restricting the voluntary exchange of immigration information with the INS. Ibid. The Court found that the Tenth Amendment, normally a shield from federal power, could not be turned into “a sword allowing states and localities to engage in passive resistance that frustrates federal programs.”
Harboring illegal entrants is a criminal offense, which is exactly what elected political hacks in sanctuary cities/states are doing when they instruct local law enforcement officers to not cooperate with ICE Agents.
JWK
Then why has the Trump administration not charged any public officials in sanctuary cities in the two years he has been in office?
Wait a second, isn’t your whole argument based upon Trump not knowing? How do you know what Trump doesn’t know?. Pointing out it’s a hard case to prove does what? Prove he’s not guilty?
And why do you keep bending what I say?
I made no claim about what Trump knows. I stated a fact ‘illegals work here’ and asked if everyone kept it secret from the boss.
My gosh, Hillary was pro sanctuary city and thought Obama was to stringent in enforcing immigration laws.
It seems hypocritical to me that those that scream from the rooftops about the federal government getting too big and overstepping their authority would be proponents of local governments being forced to cede their responsibilities and perform federal duties. Is this one of those “exceptions” where it’s more important to cleanse ourselves of undocumented immigrants than to maintain the rights of local jurisdiction?
You made that up all by yourself didn’t you?
Congrats.
Except nobody is calling for that.
My premise is that none of you ranting about this can show that Trump was in any way involved with the hiring of illegals and you can’t.
It’s asinine to think that the CEO of a multi billion dollar business empire is involved in the hiring of low end labor.
1 Like
If you really want an answer to that question, send it here: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washington, DC 20500
I take it you agree that harboring illegal entrants is a criminal offense, which is exactly what elected political hacks in sanctuary cities/states are doing when they instruct local law enforcement officers to not cooperate with ICE Agents.
JWK
There is no surer way to weaken, subdue, demoralize and then conquer a prosperous and freedom loving people than by allowing and encouraging the poverty stricken, poorly educated, low-skilled, criminal and diseased populations of other countries to invade that country, and make the country’s existing citizens tax-slaves to support the economic needs of such invaders.
I agree that no public official has been charged with harboring as a result of a sanctuary policy because it does not meet the elements of the crime.
1 Like
The Court does not agree with you as I previously documented. Elected political hacks may not command their police officers to not offer information concerning the status of aliens.
In regard to this fact, let us read Judge Harry D. Leinenweber’s recent WRITTEN OPINION dealing with 8 U.S. Code § 1373 - Communication between government agencies and the Immigration and Naturalization Service
“The constitutionality of Section 1373 has been challenged before. The Second Circuit in City of New York v. United States, 179 F.3d 29 (2d Cir. 1999), addressed a facial challenge to Section 1373 in similar circumstances. By executive order, New York City prohibited its employees from voluntarily providing federal immigration authorities with information concerning the immigration status of any alien. Id. at 31-32. The city sued the United States, challenging the constitutionality of Section 1373 under the Tenth Amendment.
Id. at 32.
_ The Second Circuit found that Section 1373 did not compel state or local governments to enact or administer any federal regulatory program or conscript local employees into its service, and therefore did not run afoul of the rules gleaned from the Supreme Court’s Printz and New York decisions. City of New York, 179 F.3d at 35. Rather, the court held that Section 1373 prohibits local governmental entities and officials only from directly restricting the voluntary exchange of immigration information with the INS. Ibid. The Court found that the Tenth Amendment, normally a shield from federal power, could not be turned into “a sword allowing states and localities to engage in passive resistance that frustrates federal programs.”
Harboring illegal entrants is a criminal offense, which is exactly what elected political hacks in sanctuary cities/states are doing when they instruct local law enforcement officers to not cooperate with ICE Agents.
JWK
The Democrat and Republican Leadership have conspired, for 35 years, to keep the border opened, and today’s Bill continues to allow and encourage illegal border crossings.
You confuse voluntary actions from demanding such actions. Why do you find it necessary to confuse the difference?
JWK
Except people do all the time.
On the contrary, I observe that pattern of behavior every single day here.
Facts are facts.
Take a breath. I never said Trump could or should be arrested for hiring illegals.
Just trying to make the point that you’re doing your best to avoid.
It’s HIS company. Give him a pass on a technicality if you must, but anyone with a memory knows this ‘pass’ is based on political persuasion, not equal treatment.
