Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

“White House sets new obstacle to immigration enforcement ”

Cynicism squared:

An administration Dec. 29 memo declares that illegal immigrants may have to be held until they’re convicted in local courts before the federal government will begin deportation proceedings.

The declaration “means lots of criminal aliens will be released if the locals don’t have the resources or inclination to prosecute, or if the [suspect] is found not guilty because of a technicality,” said Mark Krikorian, director of the Center for Immigration Studies.

The new rule shows “the administration wants to give up one of the most important tools in preserving public safety,” said Krikorian. “We’ll have more and more instances of illegals released by police because [federal immigration officials] wouldn’t take them [and] who then go on to commit some heinous crime.”

Sure. But just so long as they manage a vote first, it’s all good.

And really, it would be unfair to punish illegals merely for being illegal. Because defending our own borders if that means keeping out those hard working noble Mexicans longing to be free, or spending tax dollars on our own citizens rather than spreading it around between our citizens and those here illegally? That’s just heartless. And heartlessness is the real crime here.

8 Replies to ““White House sets new obstacle to immigration enforcement ””

  1. Squid says:

    If you illegally cross the border in the middle of the night, in order to take a job that an American won’t do (except if you pay him), you’re afforded every right under the sun. On the other hand, if you want to fly to Cleveland, you’re going to have to take off your shoes, watch your wife get felt up, and submit yourself to an prostate exam from a guy with a GED and a badge.

    John Edwards was right: there really are two Americas.

  2. B. Moe says:

    It’s kind of ironic, that the only powers the Feds seem willing to relinquish to the locals are the ones they are actually empowered with and really need to be doing themselves.

    I want to laugh but I can’t.

  3. McGehee says:

    So illegal aliens will only be deported if they commit a state crime. If they commit a federal crime such as, oh I don’t know, ENTERING THE SOVEREIGN TERRITORY OF THE UNITED STATES ILLEGALLY, well, that’s no biggie and they can stick around as long as they like.

    In Soviet America, wreckers are the government!

  4. Pablo says:

    This dovetails nicely with Obama’s Cook County homies deciding that they’re not going to honor any federal holds on illegals they have detained for other offenses. So, unless the Feds catch them in the first place, they’re walking.

  5. JHoward says:

    And heartlessness is the real crime here.

    In the long journey that is pw, this may be the nubbiest nub: Not a thing can stand when the pressure comes dolled up in a politically correct, un-thought, reactionary, group think, hive-minded fear at pointing out that socialist Santa is actually a naked fat guy in the crown prancing down main street.

    The Lie disguised in plain old denial, and it all hung on the edifice of Doing the Right Thing out of the fear of peer judgement. Yeah, we’re screwed, and as such things go, only disaster will awaken us.

  6. The Monster says:

    I’m getting sick of being told that the White House and/or DoJ have some kind of Supremacy over states on this issue. This is the text of the Supremacy Clause (emphasis mine):

    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.

    There isn’t a damned word about POTUS or AGOTUS being able to countermand a state law.

    And what difference does it make whether the illegal alien is guilty of some other crime? How does that in any way affect whether they’re in violation of immigration law? Is there some way for the state/local authorities to file a complaint with the US District Court even if Justice declines to prosecute? Could the locals file a lawsuit against DoJ every time they refuse to prosecute a case? There has to be a way to make them get in front of a judge and defend their failure to, you know, “protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”.

  7. BuddyPC says:

    Hurry up and quit dawdling! We have an election coming!

    “Higher-ups within U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services are pressuring rank-and-file officers to rubber-stamp immigrants’ visa applications, sometimes against the officers’ will, according to a Homeland Security report and internal documents exclusively obtained by The Daily.”

  8. SDN says:

    Monster, you can thank Abe Lincoln and the 14th Amendment for that.

    As for the SCOAMF, isn’t there something in his oath of office about taking care that ALL the laws be faithfully executed? Given that and his behavior, I’d say there’s a case to be made that he’s not actually the President any more.

Comments are closed.