‘We Need a Sanctuary Ordinance’: Local Attorney Addresses Humboldt’s Board of Supervisors

Welcome to our letters to the editor/opinion section. To submit yours for consideration, please send to mskymkemp@gmail.com. Please consider including an image to be used–either a photograph of you or something applicable to the letter. However, an image is not necessary for publication. Remember opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect that of Redheaded Blackbelt nor have we checked the letters for accuracy.

ICE protest

A rally on the steps of Fortuna City Hall by Centro del Pueblo, a Latino organization, in February of this year, protested the inclusion of ICE agents at recent arrests by local law enforcement. [Photo by Stormy Taylor]

Local attorney Eric Kirk posted this letter to the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors yesterday. With his permission, we repost it here.

This is my letter to the Board of Supervisors regarding tomorrow’s hearing in which the Board will take up the issue of undocumented residents and discuss a resolution supportive of the current Sheriff policy. I don’t oppose the resolution, but I am advocating a more extensive Sanctuary resolution which a group of us will submit to the Board after tomorrow. In the meantime, these are my thoughts. I encourage all Humboldt County residents to contact the Board with your own.

To the Board of Supervisors:

I have reviewed the proposed statement in favor of diversity and I appreciate the spirit behind it and the willingness of each of you to listen to some of the most vulnerable in our community who cannot vote. And although I have not yet met him personally, I am also grateful for the commitment and sincerity of Sheriff William Honsal with regard to the issues facing the large local immigrant communities.

Unfortunately I am not able to attend your meeting of August 15, 2017 and I do not have the time at the present to fully elaborate on what I believe to be at stake for the County, but I wanted to share a few thoughts with you before you pass the resolution. The following thoughts are my own and I do not speak for any other individuals or organizations though I am working with them.

I do not object to anything in the statement and I do not oppose its adoption by the Board of Supervisors. My hope is that it is a beginning rather than an end to the discussion.

I am concerned about the portion of the statement and some of the discussion regarding the encouragement of undocumented residents to work towards legalization of their residence. I am not sure that I could recommend that as an attorney right now due to the political climate and recent ICE actions. Very recently a young man cooperated with ICE authorities to process his transition to legal residence, and he was excited to report to agents that he had received a soccer scholarship at a university. Instead of recognizing his productiveness as a citizen, the agents took it as a pretext to deport him, and for good measure his brother. During this last winter ICE agents waited outside of a church in New York where some immigrants came in order to keep warm as they could not afford the heating cost for their own homes. They were ambushed upon leaving the church, and those who were undocumented were processed for deportation. The same New York Times article quoted one of the agents as saying that the change in administration has “made this job fun again.” In several states ICE agents, or local officers in compliance with voluntary cooperation agreements with ICE, have arrested suspected undocumented persons in front of crying children, one incident taking place near the school where the child was to be dropped off. And at least one allegedly abusive boyfriend of an undocumented woman has made use of the climate by notifying ICE officials of a court date in which she was to appear in order to obtain a restraining order against the boyfriend. She was arrested at the court house.

For decades now Congress has deliberated over immigration reform to address the millions – 13 million by some estimates – of undocumented residents. We can discuss whether it was “unethical” for them to come to the US for a better life for their families, but I can tell you that if I was in such a situation and concluded that even illegal immigration was best for my family I would follow exactly the same course of action. We can discuss the international politics and the history of neo-colonialism which has aggravated if not generated some of the problems in other countries which have driven people to this country. We can discuss the need to enforce even those laws with which we disagree. There is much to be discussed.

But there is also a phrase which has been used often in other local politics contexts. Local activists and leaders have spoken about the difference between government polices and “the realities on the ground.” We cannot deport 13 million people. We can only terrorize them and drive them further underground. We can break up families, bring children to tears, and strut as we tell major papers how much “fun” it is to cause pain. Or we can remain on the sidelines as we watch our neighbors, co-workers, and business people rounded up and hope future generations don’t judge us harshly – that there won’t be historical debates about whether our silence is excusable because of our historical context. Many other communities have take the right stands, and they are facing retribution from federal power as the result.

Right now, Congress is cowed with regard to immigration reform, because thanks in large part to a man who has (or has had) great influence in the current White House administration, former House Representative Eric Cantor was “primaried” for his support of immigration reform. The basis? That such reform would lead to more voters supporting the opposition party. That is why we don’t have reform, and why we do not have legal amnesty for those who would apply for legal residence. Without amnesty, I can not as an attorney recommend that undocumented people take such a course. Under the previous Administration, “Dreamers,” those who were brought into the country by their parents at a young age, were encouraged to come out of the shadows and avail themselves of a process which was promised, but has not come to fruition. Many of them do not identify with their countries of origin – some do not even speak the language. They are Americans, though the law does not currently respect them as such.

The statement as proposed is fine. It is not enough. It is not enough to support the policy of a well-intentioned Sheriff. The County needs a Sanctuary resolution which is not contingent upon the good will of the office holder, but rather a policy which actually backs him up and removes the political pressure from him to cooperate with ICE. I am not calling for a policy of civil disobedience. Obviously the County and the Sheriff must comply with all federal and state laws and no ordinance should place any official in the position of having to choose which law to follow. But we need a sanctuary ordinance which states as policy that until national policy takes a different direction, we cannot as a community in good conscience voluntarily cooperate. That kind of cooperation must be earned by the federal government. And to the degree that local agencies are required to comply with the federal government either through statutes or court orders, we should set protocols for the appropriate conduct in carrying out such duties.

In conjunction with other activists from whom you will hear on this issue, I have been involved in the drafting of such an ordinance. It is a work in progress. Personally, I hope the Board will work with us toward the passage of an ordinance which meets the needs and desires of the County. We do have the option of a ballot initiative, but there is no allowance for give and take in that process. Whatever we put forward become law word for word. I would much rather be a part of a process in which input from the communities and agencies involved is solicited and considered. I am leaving the leadership on the process to other activists, but it is the intention of the coalition to present the draft after tomorrow’s meeting.

Again, thank you for the work you have put into the issue and your consideration.

Facebooktwittergoogle_pluspinterestmail

146 comments

  • If I sneaked into the movie theater and got caught, what do you think they would do?

    • small town chatter

    • But they didn’t sneak in to watch the movie. They snuck in to serve you from behind the snack counter because you won’t work it. That they had to sneak in to do it is our shame, not theirs. Because they did so, you don’t have to pay 8 bucks a head for lettuce. But now that they’ve been here a while, sure, they’d like to sit in on a movie or two.

      • Nice work Eric, but this kind of post will bring out the cousins of KKK members here in Humbold. They forget our racist history & embrace the trumptide. The stupid, it burns.

        • Thank you VF. I’m hoping there are enough decent people to hold a serious community discussion.

          • Sharpen your pencil

            By serious you mean, a discussion that ends the way you want it. Where everyone agrees with your thinking, and abandons their own?

          • The decent people are sick and fucking tired of paying for the disproportionate amount of services used by illegals. The decent people are tired of old tropes like: illegals do the jobs you won’t do, you’re lettuce would cost $8 if not for illegals. The decent people can’t have a “serious community discussion” without bleeding heart libs calling them racist if they respect sovereignty and the rule of law.

            • Do you have a source re the “disproportionate use of services?” Because my understanding is that they use proportionately less than the population in general.

            • The “decent” people aren’t that “decent” when it comes down to it.

            • fully automated luxury gay space communism

              Real wages have declined for over a decade while productivity and corporate executive salaries have skyrocketed leading to the highest economic inequality we have seen in generations. The 4 richest families own as much as the bottom 40% of the country. But go ahead keep blaming the fruit pickers and burger flippers that make up a whole 3% of the population.

            • Your ignorance is astonishing. They PAY taxes but are DENIED benefits. Do just a tiny amount of research

              • Yes [edit], everyone who disagrees with you is either ignorant or a racist, we know. Did you just conveniently ignore THC’s link? Of course you did. He’s just a racist anyway. Do you care to provide any of this phantom research that you have done so that I might be enlightened? Let me guess, do it yourself right? Astonishing ignorance? Have you seen a mirror lately?

                https://youtu.be/4u1J6EEhkyM

        • That’s hilarious, considering the reports that the Svoboda’s are being snuck into our country via refugee crowds. Combine this with the reports that the C’Ville rally was arranged by a Democrat named Jason Kessler who was a strong Obamam supporter until Nov 2016. Continuing this line of reports, we also discover that one of the main political activists on the so called alt right, announced he is now running for office due to the alt-lefts violent push to unite all the right groups together.
          All of this is practically a step by step copy of what took place in Ukraine after Clinton, McMillan, McCain, and Soros had nice little chats with the Svoboda’s.
          So, VF, while you post about how evil all the non alt-lefties are, we non-alt-lefties will be busy asking you alt-lefties questions.
          #1. Why aren’t there protesters surrounding the statues of:
          A. Murderer Lenin in Seattle.
          B. Rapist Bill Clinton in Hollywood.
          C. Gay marriage opposer MLK jr?
          D. Racist Senator Robert KKK Byrd?
          Shall I continue or do you need time to google their names?

      • The notion that illegal immigrants do jobs that Americans do not want to do is silly. The reason that conditions in those jobs is so bad, is BECAUSE illegal immigrant labor has allowed the conditions to deteriorate, or never improve.

      • [edit] If you like Mexicans so much LIVE IN MEXICO. You have no right to force patriotic citizens to live next door to criminal aliens. DEPORT DEPORT DEPORT.
        This is our country. Stand and defend!

        • Damn, the fact we took this particular part of the United States from Mexico doesn’t strike you as making what you said the slightest bit ironic?

          • Every place on earth belonged to someone else at some point so why is that relevant? Should we pay for that and slavery until the end of time? Should we give everything back?

            • No, but maybe just show a little respect?

              • Know what, Eric?? Obama still holds the record for deportations.

                All this hysteria reeks of identity politics, which keeps us from looking at the bigger picture: the 0.01% are dividing us and keeping us at each other’s throat while they make off with all the goods…

                So tired of faux ‘libruls’….there’s a class war on and ya’ll want to focus on race, LGBTQ, sexism etc. And not that those issues aren’t *important*, they are, but man…we need to unite and expose the man behind the curtain. His name is Capitalism.

                • I agree about Obama and the deportations, though he broke records because of how well organized his government was, not because of any policy mandates. But his explicit targets were those who had recently committed crimes, not people huddling in a church for warmth.

                • fully automated luxury gay space communism

                  Oh come on, this isn’t even about identity politics. You seriously can’t see how state oppression of some of the most vulnerable segments of the working class is also a class issue? [edit]

              • If you are so full of respect for the hard working illegal immigrant, why are you in such an all fired hurry to turn him into the non working leeches you seem to think Americans are?

                Me? I’d prefer to stop importing masses of cheap workers to make huge profits for some while easing the path into poverty for Anerican workers. If that makes produce and restaurant meals more expensive, I would grow my own and eat at home happily knowing that it makes possible neighbors who are prosperous and reasonable hard working.

                • They’ve pretty much already slowed down, and there was actually a net decline of undocumented in the US a few years ago – partly because of improvements in the Mexican economy.

              • That’s funny. Talk about irony. So show a little respect to the people who have invaded my country and then demand rights while waving their flag and abusing our welfare system (that you are unsurprisingly clueless about). 10-4, I’ll be sure and get right on that. I’m sure that’s what they do when their neighbors to the south come in uninvited. No I’m positive!

            • Don’t tell that to the Israelis.

          • No one living today took anything from mexico as far as land , at the end of ww2 it was agreed upon that concuring was to end . We dont owe anyone anything, imo, if people wish to come to America to live work etc , i dont have a problem with it , but they need to follow the rules to do so, as i expect anyone ,from anywhere to do. If anyone cant do the paperwork and get approved , there is a reason for it. If they dont and they get in trouble , then by all means that info needs to be forwarded on to the people that take care of such things.

          • Of course, the fact we’d invaded the Mexican capital had nothing to do with him selling it to us. I’m pretty sure you’d feel very comfortable having sold your house for less than it was worth to someone who held a gun to your head. https://www.britannica.com/event/Mexican-American-War

          • Mexicans held ownership for a very brief time
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranchos_of_California

            • Yes. A little less than half as long as the United States has owned it and they stole it from the Native Americans. However, I’m not sure if the length of time I’ve owned something means anything in terms of having it stolen from me. Even if I’m not responsible for my grandfather’s armed robbery, it seems like I ought to be at least a little bit aware of the injustice when I’m dealing with the grandchildren of the people that were robbed.

        • You are living in Mexico!

      • Sharpen your pencil

        Btw, this comment will not help your cause. You wish to change peoples ways of thinking by insulting them and their work ethic….. Also, the person you insulted probably isn’t breaking the law just being here….

      • The labor issue is weak. So, give them a sanctuary city because they work for slave wages? They work for little pay because its all they have, its not a choice if they want any sort of income. I’ll pay a little more knowing whoever is working is getting paid fairly. I can’t imagine myself sneaking into another country, illegally and expecting any kind of rights. I would expect the opposite.

      • Really haven’t seen one working the theater lately, they had to sneak? Plenty came legally didn’t have to sneak.. to do work I won’t, durning high school I worked in a Theater so there goes that excuse…Leatuce is cheaper because someone who is illegal is picking it… Have you ever heard of a work visa? There is no good argument for sneaking in anywhere when you can do it legally.

      • Humboldt Idiocracy

        Erik, your sneaking in to the movie theater to work analogy is way off base. I agree that there is a lot of work that many citizens will not do, however, legal immigrants have been doing that work for years. They are the ones suffering the most from illegal immigration, and many of them know it. Employers can pay illegal immigrants far below minimum wage, save on insurance, worker’s compensation, etc. because everything is done under the table. The legal immigrants who are willing to do that work can no longer afford to because wages are driven so far down. They can support their families better on welfare. This has nothing to do with feelings and everything to do with the facts and consequences of having millions of people here taking from the system but not giving back to it. 20% of Mexico’s economy is from people sending over money they earn here, taking that money out of our system and putting it into another. It hurts all of us.

        • It wasn’t my analogy. I was working off of someone else’s.

          And the better the economy in Mexico, the fewer immigrants.

      • Out of curiousity, how do you justify fighting for a higher minimum wage and worker protections while silmutaneously defending unlawful immigration on the grounds that those jobs can’t pay the minimum wage and provide the worker protections without doing harm to our economy?

        Why is it ok for them to suffer and be taken advantage of by corporations, but not us?

        If we need abusive and unlawful labor structures to provide essential food and services, doesn’t that raise more concern than the desire to regulate who enters our country?

        • I think those are valid points. But if you removed the threat of deportation there would be more collective bargaining. It is the fear of deportation which hold them down as a labor force, and hotels and other employers have actually called ICE on people who tried to organize.

          But another part of the reason they are willing to work for lower wages is that the money they make goes farther at home.

          Again, I think if we opened the borders to labor organizing as well as capital, much of that would resolve itself.

          And we could go after employers who knowingly hire illegal labor. That would all but end the immigration overnight. But we don’t do that.

          There are a lot of nuances. Right now my main priority is let’s not go after the more vulnerable scapegoats.

          • My main concern with these “Sanctuary” policies is that they never seem tailored to protect genuinely hard working and otherwise law-abiding human beings, while still bringing down the hammer on criminals. In a county as overrun with cartel backed drug industry and with such a huge number of legal citizen criminals, the last thing we need is to proudly declare to other nations and organized criminal groups that they can export their problems to our courts and prisons on our tax-payer dime. Even Hillary Clinton, during her time in the senate, recognized that our current border policies encouraged southern nations to essentially outsource their criminal justice system and social services to the US — letting us carry the load instead of solving their own problems domestically. She even encouraged sanctions against the Mexican government and the construction of a physical barrier to hinder unlawful entry.

            I suppose “would be nice” is a hopeless term when in comes to the US congress, but it sure would be nice if we focused on providing targeted and effective foriegn aid to improve conditions south of the border, and streamlining the god-awful bureaucratic nightmare of legal immigration and work-visas, rather than just letting anyone in and hoping most of them are nice and not drug smugglers or human traffickers or violent criminals.

            • All being a sanctuary city/county/state means is that local personnel and resources will not be voluntarily involved in immigration enforcement by ICE. It does not prohibit cooperation with joint task forces with regard to criminal activity. ICE isn’t even really trained for law enforcement. We would just be saying, “As long as your policy targets undocumented residents who haven’t committed crimes you are on your own.” Period. Warrants still have to be honored. Suspects of crimes still have to be held. But we don’t have to notify ICE when undocumented misdemeanor convicts are released, and we don’t have to hold people for ICE when they’re pulled over for speeding tickets. And we certainly don’t have to report to ICE when someone calls the police, or visits the ER, or applies for unemployment, and so on.

              • Unfortunately, many other jurisdictions have used sanctuary policies to shield individuals with prior violent criminal records from being taken into ICE custody when they’re re-arrested for less serious crimes. That’s my concern.

                Also, if undocumented individuals are applying for tax-funded unemployment, they SHOULD be reported. That’s fraud.

      • The citizens also would work the counter if they were given benefits in exchange. But they’re not. They’re given benefits for not working.

      • I have had Erik Kirk bring a completely frivolous lawsuit against me personally and I can’t think of a better example of what is wrong with the American legal system than that human being.

    • Did you sneak into the movie theater for a better life for you and your children????

  • I have a horse trailer ICE can borrow if they round up too many…

  • Don’t really agree with this. My wife is an immigrant. She went through the whole process, which was stressful, expensive, and humiliating. If the community provides a sanctuary, it is very likely we will have more crime than we already have, as demonstrated by the cities of San Francisco, Chicago, Portland Ore., New York, and on and on. A path to citizenship for undocumented people should be considered, but just opening the doors to anyone is not good.

    • The process is lengthy and sometimes takes decades, with no guarantees (currently) that the applicant won’t be deported in the meantime.

      Re the crime, there are statistics all over the place. The Sanctuary advocates would bring your attention to the following:

      On average, 35.5 fewer crimes are committed per 10,000 people in sanctuary counties compared to non-sanctuary counties. Median household annual income is, on average, $4,353 higher in sanctuary counties compared to non-sanctuary counties. The poverty rate is 2.3 percent lower, on average, in sanctuary counties compared to non-sanctuary counties. Unemployment is, on average, 1.1 percent lower in sanctuary counties compared to non-sanctuary counties.

      But I’m not really into this aspect of the argument either way, because correlation is not necessarily causation. Sanctuary provisions in no cities protect anyone from criminal prosecution. ICE shouldn’t be involved in that anyway, as their agents are not even seriously trained for criminal enforcement.

      • “Sanctuary provisions in no cities protect anyone from criminal prosecution.”

        Illegally crossing the border is a crime.

        • Actually, it’s charged as a civil violation. Otherwise they would be entitled to government paid attorneys.

          • Criminality depends on how a person entered, what they told officials, whether they worked by using gorged documents, etc.

        • fully automated luxury gay space communism

          How does any government have the right to tell us where we can travel, live, or work? Screw their arbitrary lines in the sand, I’m a free man. I won’t let anyone tell me where I can’t go, and I will support and facilitate anyone else’s freedom of movement. Laws be damned.

          • Amen. Lawyers are the worst. And they actually defend horrible people and learn how to argue for them. Wodnerfull!! Erik Kirk doesn’t even live down here

      • and who’s fault is that? We Californians pay outrageous taxes for our officials to achieve their Constitutional duties, such as immigration screening and processing. Instead, they hire lawyers to screw us out of even more taxes.
        End the perpetual wars.
        Demand better & faster screening and processing. (you know, add a computer or two).
        Demand the HOR’s stop funding perpetual wars that create refugees.
        Demand the HOR’s stop wasting our tax dollars on unconstitutional issues and start using our dollars on constitutional issues such as immigration stations for processing.

        If it’s not an enumerated power, it’s not constitutional power.
        If it’s not in keeping with the constitution, it’s not a constitutional law.

        Immigration is one of the few things that ARE constitutional. It’s also the most ignored by the states.

        It’s unconstitutional for electeds to form allegiances for power. Mayors are in deep chit.
        It’s unconstitutional for states to create treaties with foreign countries. The governor is in deep chit.
        It’s unconstitutional to harbor fugitives and felons. Towns are in deep chit.
        It’s unconstitutional to conspire against the constitution, the people. All you idiots are in deep chit.

        We the people want what’s constitutional. We demand for all people who reside in our country (Calif), to be on equal footing of opportunity. This can only be done through legal process. Hiding and sheltering does not provide equal footing. It enslaves.

        When the fluff is taken out of the story, only the intent remains.

  • Thinking allowed

    We have 13 million illegal immigrants because of years of ignoring the law in the service of greed and self interest. And frankly an exaggerated idea of our own worth that we thought ee were in control of the wealth of the country and always would be.

    So now that we have made disrespect for the law into some distorted and confused ideal of nobility, do you think that creating limits at this late date would be pain free? You simply can not expect people to come do your work then leave when you want them to go. They might have another idea.

    It is always a hoot to see signs about everyone also being an immigrant therefore shut up. Knowing the history what happens to residents who are not in control of their own neighborhoods is the strongest argument for regulating immigration, not a reason to form some sense of brotherhood with those who hate you yet choose to show up on your doorstep.

    • People broke the ordinances which empowered Woolworth’s lunch counter discrimination decades ago. I agree that breaking a law is not virtue. Neither is following it.

      • I need a tshirt that says “Breaking a law is not virtue. Neither is following it.” Well, said.

        • Then why ever follow a law? Think driving 110 mph is fine- do it. Think having sex with a 12 year girl is fine – do it. That thinking knows no limits.

          No, you don’t get to pick and chose what laws you will follow. There are laws because there are consequences to just doing what suits you personally. The people who broke segregation laws deserve more respect than that. They did so with great deliberation and from great need. It was an act of courage. What you’re suggesting is an act of convenience.

          There is virtue in following the law. It is a virtue to try and get along inside of the civil compact if you also use what the civil contract gives. That are what laws are- the limits of a civil contract. Only the need to follow a much higher virtue could be a reason to thumb your nose at society by deliberately breaking the law. Too many people already treat others with disrespect on the slimmest of pretexts.

          At first I was rather shocked that an attorney would trivialize the law so broadly. But after a minute it was clear it must be a real temptation that comes from years of practice twisting the law to derive personal advantage, which is basically what American attornys are so good in doing. No wonder they have contempt for what they manipulate at will.

          Beside this argument is the usual distraction technique of W C Fields mentioned- “If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them bullshit.” In this case, pro open immigration keep the idea of doing something real on slowing the illegal border crossings by saying that so many already here can’t be deported. Then it becomes like elephant tailing at a stop sign. A car follows so closely behind without stopping that the other people trying to cross can’t squeeze in. In this case the US is told that someone is in the country illegally but can’t be deported because they have family here. From there it becomes their family must be allowed in too, even to the 9th degree cousin or fiance. This soon devolves to a defacto open border. In other words a sanctuary city.

          • Mostly I agree that following laws is the best way to provide for a civil society. I don’t walk on grass when there are signs telling me not to even if can’t see the reason the sign is there. However, if I can see that the law does more harm than good–say if a child is being attacked on the lawn by a dog and running over the grass is better than letting the child be mauled—then I believe breaking the law is the right thing to do. We all pick and choose which laws to follow. Those of us who care about society should follow the laws even when it disadvantages us. But when the law causes more harm than good…well, break the damn thing.

            • And good luck in any other country in the world. Even Canada, which thinks itself so superior to the US , happily ships most illegals back and their laws on immigration are much tougher than ours.

            • So, beside the sheer difficulty if such an evaluation, would you count a person being unable to earn more than minimum wage because there are ten illegals waiting to do the work in his place? Do you count as harm using public funds to cover the volume of incareration for crimes done by those who either couldn’t do such stuff in the home country or whose home country wanted them gone? Do you count as harm the violent confrontation between cultures where the public stance is that the current residents are almost always in the wrong in trying to ieep their own culture but it’s racist to ask the immigrant to do some adapting? Do you count as harm if they do adapt? Do you count as harm the endless hearings, repeat deportations, demands for accomodation, etc created by those who hear on one hand immigration rules are unfair and to be ignored yet somehow are expected to understand that beloved principles like religious freedoms or gender equality or private property or even honesty are to be followed? When even natives are pretty unclear on the details of that?

              • I don’t agree with all of your assumptions. Let me ask just one question. Since the crackdown on illegal immigrants, has there been problems finding workers? Here’s an article that addresses that: http://fortune.com/2017/08/08/immigration-worker-shortage-rotting-crops/ Do you count that as harm to America?

                • Thinking allowed

                  First these are not assumptions. Or at least I can’t see where ‘assumption’ applies. There is a huge immigrant incarceration rate in California. Most people scheduled for an immigration hearing don’t ever show up for it. Forged immigration, visa papers and stolen social security numbers are very common. It is easy to get the official figures. Or at least it is until someone uses them to question policies publicly. Then they get taken out of the public domain.

                  The problem is mostly not getting employees but not getting them at cheap enough wages. Offer enough money and someone will do the work. It becomes a balancing act where an employer judges whether they can sell their produce, pay wages and get the profit they want. America is addicted to cheap produce. We pay less proportionally for food than almost anywhere else. And this is because we have turned a blind eye to the use of foreign labor at cheap rates. Same for restaurant work. Open the kitchen door in many places and see who’s there.

                  My feeling is we need to be paying more, have less sharp employment practices so work is more enjoyable and respect those who do work instead of expecting them to carry those who don’t . People will work if the money and conditions are good enough.

                  If a business complains they can’t find workers, they usually mean either they can’t find sober people with a even modest education or they can’t find people cheap enough.

                  Now this is not, despite the spew, a Republican position. That is a group that loves cheap labor. They want all the illegals they can get to create profit. They just don’t want to have them demanding stuff.

                  It’s also not a Democrat position because they have their own dirty little agenda where it comes to business profits too. They just like to call the Republicans heartless but they are both pretty greedy. The fact that both parties agree on this one issue is how no effective enforcement of regulations continued for decades.

                  It’s a personal one that comes from decades of talking to working people of all stripes from the illegal farm laborer to the international CEO. I have straightened out the mess for a family that had one child born in the US and every other family member- 60 of them illegals- reported earnings all over the country on that one number. In the process of that, I ran into a company that had a dozen illegals working using the same social security number. The company didn’t care. They got good labor cheap. And did not have to hire most expensive native labor. And this was one dase in many.

                  You tend to think of illegals as running in desperation from intolerable conditions. There are some like that. But mostly the reason for this problem is greed. The greed of Wall Street and/or main street for cheap labor that causes little problems, the greed of Americans who want cheap food, services and goods and the greed of foreigners many who come (or rather came but that’s another story) to make money without regard for the natives. They go home if things get rough because fixing things here is not where they are emotionally invested.

                  This is unhealthy for the native workers whose labor is not very valuable anymore, it’s morally damaging to have an imported underclass expected to do distasteful jobs for those ‘too good’ to do their own work and it has helped to create a general belief that sensible people should chose to disregard any laws that inconvenience them.

          • Well, many chose to violate the Jim Crow laws. There are moments when independent conscience require it.

            And then there are the laws which are written and maintained in simple denial of human conditions. The immigration laws are among those. IMO.

            • You keep trotting out a comparison to american race history. How belittling that is to a people who struggled mightily against overwhelming odds in their own country. All you are doing is trying to create guilt by association in those who argue against you where there is no factual comparison.

              • Or maybe that’s just how you’re trying to read it. I do view the immigration laws as akin to Jim Crow. Unless you wrote the laws, I’m not quite sure how you’re finding “guilt by association” in anything I say.

                • Thinking allowed

                  Ah, the next step in poor argument. “You don’t understand.” Well I’m here to enlighten on exactly what I don’t understand.

                  Jim Crow laws were written and enforced to make it impossible for Americans of a certain race to use their Constitutional rights in order theat the white majority could maintain the status quo. It was meant threaten and intimidate citizens.

                  On the other hand, immigration laws were designed to protect citizens from non citizens by placing some limits on entrance into the country. Every country has them in order to maintain some control over who can access the systems and benefits that the citizens put in place and making somewhat sure that people with bad intentions are held at bay.

                  If you had your way apparently any restrictions are an immoral law, designed to deprive humans of their right to access what ever country they bloody well please. So in your world, all that would have been necessary for – let’s say fascists- to make the US into a fascist state is to simply send enough people who like fascism to the US. Or if they preferred a certain religion, the same. Or they looked to the US for medical care, or unemployment or a safe place to conduct a guerilla war against their enemies, the doors are open. Or they simply dirtied their own nest so badly they needed a haven or they needed a protected place to traffic people of drugs. Whatever. The door is open.

                  So that’s ridiculous exaggeration you say? There must be some limits? So you are faced with pointing your finger at one person and say I don’t like you and out you go. Or pointing your finger at another and saying in.

                  The alternative is to have some sort of system. Oh horrors- an immigration system is born.

                  The idea of a sanctuary city is as offensive and incivil as possible. The idea that one town-of even, I heard, a bar- can decide that the laws of the land are wrong and they are right. Hubris and chutzpah. And unusually stupid. I can understand protecting one individual based on knowing that party but a blanket up yours to the whole rest of country who might have valid points in objecting?

            • You have a vendetta against the U.S. Constitution and should not be allowed to practice law.

              The laws in this country are here to protect its native citizens. They were created by native citizens. The Constitution was written for U.S. citizens. Leftist street activists like yourself and the ex-prez (tightens my throat to say it) believe in NO BORDERS. That is a globalist/socialist agenda that is in direct conflict with everything this country stands for and a nation state’s SOVEREIGNTY.

              It’s all about cheap labor and voting democratic, the only reasons leftists want illegals in this country. Look at the voting registration scandal in California. Thousands of people registered over the voting age counts for those counties. With only one exception, ALL those counties are stuffed full of illegals.

              You are a disgrace to the state and the union. You promote and even flaunt illegality in the name of your socialist, anti-American agenda. Patriots will not stand for it.

              • Well, there’s a lot in there.

                The Constitution renders immigration a federal jurisdiction. Local governments are not required to participate in the enforcement of immigration law. That’s been established.

                As to the rest of it, well, that’s the new political discourse in the country at the moment. Hopefully it’s a passing phase.

                • Thinking allowed

                  What delightful twists you make. So if interstate kidnapping is federal jurisdiction crime, you favor letting the kidnapper drive right past city police and they should refuse to take action? Or civil rights violations.

          • Are you kidding? You forget where you live? A large percentage of local native sons and daughters have been breaking laws including tax evasion for 50 frick’n years. So spare me the sermon on following the law. Some laws are B.S. We have a president who talks tough while he and his family use immigrant and foreign workers to build their empire. Spare Me.

            • Thinking allowed

              You meant the same small but noisy selection of people who happily violate the law to enrich themselves at others’ expense? Who then call that law wrong because it might interfere with their profits and enjoyment? Who don’t pay taxes on their profits but complain, complain and complain about the government they don’t pay for?

              If so, I agree. But I doubt we’d derive the same conclusion in the end.

  • Citizens arrest of illegal immigrants is legal if they are committing a felony.

  • Sharpen your pencil

    You say “Some of the most vulnerable residents, who can not vote”. I say illegal immigrants that have no right to be here, lol let alone have the right to dictate what laws to break….. As Coach Ditka would day “c’mon man!”….. “As a lawyer I can’t say that working towards legal status is a good idea, given curtain policies” you have got to be FUCKIKNG kidding me with this line of shit! If you don’t want to be legal move the fuck back to what ever shitholes you climbed out of!

  • Erik Kirk is a far left wing leftist.

    He would like nothing more than to further polarize our community and cause more hate & tension.

    • As opposed to a right wing leftist?

      Come on people. We can discuss this.

      • It seems we can discuss this as long as we see it your way. If we differ in opinion we are called racist. We can throw numbers around to do what ever we want, it’s been done for years. I am tired of being told I have to be ashamed of being a white American because of “snowflake politics”. I know immigrants that have worked for legal status and are proud they followed the rules. They stuck out the process. I know Americans that have and do work these so called jobs you say they won’t work. You have to be willing to accept the responsibility of your choices, we live in a “I want it now” attitude world and refuse to work for the reward. I am a white American that has had to work for what I have, it isn’t much, but I believe in rules and responsibilities. I believe we need to help the others in society that need help, but they need to work for it also. “Snowflake politics” equals “Intitlement” and lazyness. Believing in rules and and wanting a safer life is not racism and hate. I agree we can discuss this, but lets do it without false propaganda to spread fear and lies.

        • Let’s make a pact then. I won’t call you racist if you don’t call me snowflake.

          And then let’s discuss how easy it is to work farms.

    • Why attack someone personally? Can’t you refute their ideas?

      • If you use innuendo is that not a personal attack? Ils just lower and meaner.

        • What innuendo are you talking about?

          • The dragging in of Jim Crow and the famous Greensboro lunch counter. That is his argument, that opposing illegal immigration is equivalent to being racists practicing violent segregation.

            Kirk shields his slight, invalid, uncomplicated but congenial beliefs by saying that opposing him is being that racist.

            • I love the strawmen! Only one side of the discussion is repeatedly bringing up racism. Maybe there’s just a little defensiveness involved?

              • Thinking allowed

                I think that you do love them because that is exactly what bringing up racism is. Defensive yourself? Because that is the next step in poor quality argument- ad hominen attacks.

    • “Erik Kirk is a far left wing leftist.”

      Hardly; ‘the left’ has been watered down for so long with ‘centrist’ Democrapic policy that the term has lost it’s true meaning.

  • Eric, being against racism & hate is risky business. Thanks for taking it on. Really

  • Ridiculous. Illegal is illegal.
    File the paperwork and come legal or get deported and barred from ever coming back.
    Weak [edit]

  • If they truly want to become American Citizens, that’s one thing, Ime, many only want to take advantage of our economic opportunities while flying the Mexican flag.

    Companies who knowingly employ illegal immigrants (Sun Valley Floral) should face the harshest criminal prosecution.

    • That would end undocumented migration overnight. But nobody wants to do that because they don’t want to be accountable to the public for dramatic increases in the price of food, among other things.

      • Thinking allowed

        On part of that I agree. Greed is the ruling agenda in non enforcement of Congress’s own laws. Companies rely on that.

        But it would not end immigration. Just slow illegal immigration, not even end that.

  • Okay Eric, let’s discuss:
    My born-in-Mexico abuelo wanted a better life in the US, so he joined the US army, was sent into war, risked his life and thus earned his citizenship. As a result, he was able to live and raise a family here in California until he passed away 3 years ago. I was always somewhat shocked when he would mutter under his breath when the topic of illegal Mexicans came up “They should go back to their own country!”. I’d say “Those are you’re people!” to which he would reply “There are the takers and the givers. I’m a giver….a worker. Not a taker!” In his broken English he was known for saying “I will do!” and he did….the hard way.
    I am part Mexican. My father (my abuelo’s son) raised me to love the Mexican culture. And he also raised me to appreciate and respect the process of success. Without any process, success isn’t earned. It’s a hard process. It’s not suppose to be easy; given out.
    I am a mother who does not wish to see anyone go hungry, homeless or abused. At the same time I expect my boys to earn their keep and not back down from the word ‘hard’. I know there are plenty of illegal immigrants who work hard. I am not lumping them into a group of nothing but lazy moochers. But they need to follow the process that is in place as set up by the law. Everyone has their own struggle, some will be tougher than yours, some will be easier, but it isn’t for us to judge. Rather, it is up to people as individuals to to take responsibility for their actions and undergo the process. No excuse.

    • The process is simply inadequate and slow. I believe one case took 26 years to resolve.

      No, it’s not supposed to be easy. But it shouldn’t be so hard either.

      Again, if my family was living in poverty and I saw an opportunity I would take it. We can debate whether something is ethical. But human nature is what it is. If my family was hungry and I lacked options, I would steal. I wouldn’t murder, but I would steal.

      And even more likely would I take an action which is not legal, but also not harmful. 13 million – more actually, because many come, work hard, make their money, and return to where the money has more purchase value – have come here. As has been discussed, many were brought here as children. To deport 13 million, or even 2 million, would require a lot of inhumanity, not to mention huge cost and disruption of entire communities which have metabolized the immigration and even benefited from it.

      So, sure, we can debate whether it was moral or ethical for them to come here – I would argue that it needs to be considered on a case-by-case basis and so a huge topic with immense complexity.

      Or we can discuss the reality. 13 million are here. Thousands locally. Some have worked hard and own homes, and even in some cases businesses. Their children are school friends with my children, and they come to my home where I have fed and talked with them. Perhaps it’s the same with you. I have coached them on soccer teams. I have represented them. I claim some as friends, colleagues, and given some of my daughter’s interactions they may even be in-law family some day. I cannot imagine local life without them. Can you?

      They are not alien to the community. They are part of it. And they deserve the community’s protection from hateful, short-sighted, expensive, and impractical politics/policies.

      Maybe they should have followed a different course to get here. But that’s irrelevant at this point. They’re here.

      It’s about the people and the connections between them, more than ideology or policy.

      • While the process to become a legal citizen is indeed lengthy/hard, in order to ‘qualify’ for benefits (food stamps, housing vouchers, financial assistance for school, etc etc) is a very easy process. I believe that is where a lot of people who ‘want the illegals out’ are coming from. Having that assistance given out so readily does hurt (in the wallet) those who are paying their taxes (all of them) and simply paying more for what many illegal immigrants pay far less for.
        Here is an example that may help you understand where the frustration is coming from:
        My family took in an illegal Mexican (lets call her Mirna) and her two US born kids because my mother felt that Mirna couldn’t become a citizen due to various hardships she was encountering in her life (partially due to being illegal here). Again, I come from a family who not only is part Mexican, but believes in helping their fellow human being. My family housed them, fed them and gave them money to help Mirna start the process of becoming legal. She lived with my family for over a year and literally only watched telenovelas. She did have a gall stone issue which put her in the hospital for a week or so (all medical expenses were payed for by the state-she didn’t pay a dime). She didn’t even attempt to learn the english language. My (Mexican) father became frustrated with her lack of attempt to do anything that he told her she had to leave. She moved in with distant family members. Before her youngest daughter turned 18 (and lost her financial assistance as a youth) Mirna moved back to Mexico (leaving her two kids here since they were old enough to care for themselves). Mirna was here in the US for roughly 18 years, never learned the language, never got any job (whatsoever..regardless of legality) and moved back as soon as the money stopped coming.
        Again, “Mirna” does not represent every illegal immigrant, but I can give you a handful of other specific examples. And I realize that there are many good stories about illegals as well. This is not a bashing of any side, but just trying to see it from both sides…because I believe there are valid complaints on both sides. Are there legal citizens that abuse the system too? Absolutely, and perhaps that (the ease of handouts) is where people need to focus their frustrations on and demand change. Just as there are companies that are certified organic, can there be companies that are certified legal (so that those who want to pay a higher price for items made/picked by legal citizen can vote with their dollar)? I believe legal folks feel just as powerless as illegal immigrants in that they don’t have any say in which laws are enforced and who gets what.
        People of Humboldt: instead of getting mad at specific individuals, people (ie: you) need to put their money where their mouth is and demand change. You don’t always get to have your pan dulce and eat it too.

        • I’m going to have to read and respond to this with more focus later. But I could advocate the legalization process more readily if we had amnesty in place. Under the current climate, I can’t recommend it. Not when people who voluntarily participate become targeted for deportation. Not with the events of the past few months.

      • So of you saw a bag of money and you were poor you would take it ? Dorry did not read your whole drawn out post but i did read the first part about doing whatever it took to get money legal or not. Sounds pretty crimminal to me. I personally have met people in other countries that love our so much and want to move here so badly for many differant reason, yet they refuse to break the law to com here because they respect this country and say to do anything else would taint it . Think about that for a minute , we have people waiti g to come here , that respect our laws and ways of doing things so much that they feel doing anything other than following the law would somehow change or taint what they love about this country. The. You talk about people coming here for a better life , you are saying they are coming here to recive something, yet they dont respect our ways , infact when they come here illegaly they are saying they dont even care about our ways they want what they want and are going to take it with or without our giving it to them. That is the differance

  • I have to admit my knowledge of illegal immigrants is fairly limited but everyone I know/knew whether from Canada, England, or Mexico was hard working and contributed in multiple ways to our community including volunteering at non-profits, paying taxes, and generally being a decent human being.

    The one person I know sent back to her country was harmed by it and our community lost her productivity. This has left me with a distaste for the inhumanity of our immigration laws and the on the ground effects to our community.

    And if my family was suffering so badly that a field hand’s wages in another country were worth the danger of crossing an arbitrarily drawn border away from everything I loved and held dear, I’d hope that I’d have the courage to break the law for my sons’ sake.

    • I know many people who had high paying jobs and lost them to cheaper illegal workers. At one time working as a butcher in a meat producer paid pretty good wages for hard work. Then a CEO of a packing plant brought in truck loads of immigrants to work at half wages. Other companies followed suit and suddenly such work became the equivalent of fast food work as a livelihood. Look at the recent Disney tech lay offs while the corporations brought in cheap foreign labor. There is and has been a sizable cost for masses of illegals too- many employees are working under stolen social security numbers and with forged green cards. That has a cost too.

      Part of PL’s game plan was to bring in workers from Mexico to run all spanish speaking teams of fallers at 60% of the wages they paid native employees. When these workers had a seasonal lay off, they found they were never able to get back on payroll again, even if they agreed to a reduction in wages.

      Sun Valley was built on illegal labor. Not because there were no workers locally but because there were no workers who could be worked in violation of the Fair Labor laws at such a low wage. Immigrants, especially illegal ones, are unfamiliar with the guarantees under US law and are usually reluctant to push their employers for their rights. They are simply less of a problem for unscrupulous employers. Yet scrupulous employers have to compete with them to their loss.

      The old ‘they produce your food’ argument is always trotted out but never in concert with the other ‘farmers are abusing immigrant workers’ argument. As if the two things don’t go hand in hand. Employers use immigrants to avoid paying a solid wage and to avoid the complications of work regulations. This is a nasty relationship where employers get a bigger profit, consumers get cheaper produce and illegals find work at the cost for American workers and innovation. As long as its cheaper to use immigrants, no one wastes money on developing equipment to do unpleasant or dangerous jobs. Where is the morality in that?

      Some immigration is stimulating to a country. Masses of unregulated immigration is destructive.

      • Those are some very good points. You bring up concerns that I have, too. One of my main concerns is that illegal workers contribute to poor work conditions for all workers because their fear of speaking up and getting deported means that unethical employers can continue to provide bad conditions.

  • Fortuna should be renamed to Fort Mexico. I’m a firm believer if you ain’t legal get the hell out quit bitching go back to Mexico. I mean what kind of citizens are they ,they can’t pay taxes they got no social security number not doing anything good for the country except bleeding it dry. If undocumented aliens had their documents they wouldn’t have to worry about Ice, and do protesting ,and bring light to their situation .it’s the illegals that make the meth ,coke ,heroin ,and let’s face it 9 times out of ten they are out growing 10, 000 plant grows in our state forests .not being racist just stating facts.

    • A lot of them use the same social security number or someone elses.

    • Actually they do pay taxes. And they pay into social security from which they won’t collect.

      • Actually much of the time they don’t. It is not uncommon for such employers to not pay what they collect, if they collect anything in the first place, to the government. When the illegal subsequently files for social security benefits, if they ever do and every gets to age 65 if they don’t die first, then the money is supposed to come from the employer but good luck on ever getting it. Same for worker’s comp, SDI, health insurance, unemployment.

        As for self employment.. yeah, right.

        And social security is not income taxes.

        Gee- how much more could I keep if I didn’t get car insurance, get licensed .

        • How much do you think paying retroactive tax on the illegal profits on pot over the last 50 years would come to? Save the Dudley Do Right spiels on immigrants getting away with stuff. The drug laws were a crock and so is this recent anti immigrant push. Blue collar jobs disappeared because the ceo’s and stockholders wanted bigger profits.

  • If they want to live here they need to become legal. We do not need sanctuary cities or states. Working for the county, I knew of mothers that got cash aid for any child born in the United States and whined if there was not enough to pay all of her bills. People that were deported after being convicted of a crime left their children here with friends who continued to collect the cash aid and right after being deported they were right back in our country. The people that were deported years ago in Humboldt county by ICE either had warrants for their arrest or were convicted felons.

  • I have to chuckle at some of the local attorneys here who are pushing federalism hard now. It was OK to support the Feds as having exclusive jurisdiction and authority over immigration matters when DACA & DAPA was implemented but now when the immigration laws — already on the books — are being enforced, state law should override the Constitution.

    • I hate to throw all attorneys under same bus, but using the law to get what they want while using the same law to keep others from getting the same thing is what they do. Tends to create contempt for all not able to do the same.

  • Higher Standards Humboldt

    Seriously? If illegal immigrants live in the US, make money in the US, send their kids to public schools, use the public infrastructure (such as roads..), take government handouts (like free medical care) and dont pay taxes that is STEALING from every hardworking tax paying American. If an American showed up in Mexico without proper work Visas and started to work they would be arrested or deported. WHY SHOULD AMERICA NOT DO THE SAME? Become legal citizens pay taxes like every American has to or LEAVE! Bad behavior, such as illegal immigration should not be rewarded by allowing them to remain in our country without paying their dues.

  • If you care to hear what the refugees and immigrants think on the subject, this might be a good place to start. They hate it. They just want to stay home. The only way that can happen, is for politicians to stop their for profit war games.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzSMIOMrgQM

  • That looks like that Racist employee from CR named Renee. She needs to go back to Berkeley and the 70’s.

  • Thinking allowed

    There has always been resistance about immigration when large volumes from specific locations come. With them come all the problems of their home land, along with the good. The mafia, the IRA, the anti new regime in the old country, even mass slavery was an import in colonial times.

    There are two things that make this a problem now. One is that coming here is no longer much of a struggle. At least not as much when coming up with passage money was, along with simply surviving in a new country with basically no services if you could’t make your own way. So people struggled to make this their home. They did not expect to be bobbing back and forth, never severing old ties like they do now.

    And with the ‘Americans are always wrong’ crying jag the country has been subject to since the Vietnam war, too many new immigrants don’t want to be Americans. They want to use America to make money but feel free to disparage it always, just like the noisiest of natives, blaming everyone else while clinging to their old identity. Makes for poor neighbors when it didn’t have to be like that.

    The American Dream wasn’t always what you hear now- get rich. It used to be to live with guarantee of liberties and the protections of individuals of a republic. Somehow that has been drowned out by the magnification of every trial and tribulation as a wholesale failure.

  • When the emotional fluff is blown off, only the grit remains.
    “Steven wants a puppy, because he loves puppies and thinks they’re the cutest animals on earth. Steven thinks you are a bully for not allowing him to have one, just because he doesn’t have the ways and means to care for it. He really loves puppies and should be allowed to get one, if you ask me. I’ve studied the psychology behind puppies and well being and if Steven is denied a puppy, he will fall victim to many areas of concern, such as depression, anger, even juvenile delinquency. It is a never ending cycle. A cycle that can be broken if we just get him a puppy. All in favor of Steven getting a puppy, say yay. All opposed, say nay. All opposers will be shunned from this moment on.”.

    Those who can identify the emotional fluff in the Steven story are giant steps ahead of the game.
    Those who can pick out just the grit, are even further ahead of the game.

    Know your propaganda.

    http://www.rickety.us/2008/11/how-to-recognize-propaganda/

    • Thinking allowed

      Reminds me of one of the Asimov stories when a politician’s speech was analyzed, eliminating all the meaningless phrases to arrive,at the end, with everything eliminated. It took a hour’s talking to say nothing at all.

      • Do you know how Asimov thought about immigration issues and national borders?

        • Thinking allowed

          Why would I care? Writing novels, no matter how entertaining, does not make him an expert on immigration. I’d be surprised if he didn’t come from the very protected world of academia. I imagine, like many well off people, he never felt HIS job was threatened by an illegal. In fact, I wouldn’t be shocked if his sole contact with illegals was as domestics.

          Imagine the difference in his feelings about AI writing better books.

  • Right on ! Its not too late to send the Irish and Italians packing. We excluded the Chinese when they started working the gold fields and profiting on “our” rightful share of god’s manna. Tell you what….how about a Bulgarian exclusion law?

  • I’ll take your word that your post is communicating something. Not sure what it is, but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt.

  • How about become a citizen the right way and then this debate disappears. I’m all for breaking laws. I’m all for human rights. I’m all for Mexicans living here. Now just do it properly. Eric Kirk makes it seems like it takes giving up your first born to become a legal United States citizen. People immigrate legally all the time. I know people that have. Yes, a little time spent and making the drive to San Francisco, but BFD. Screw the illegals.

    • It’s much more complicated than you think, and right now most do not want to be under the radar of the federal government. Hence the need for amnesty.

  • Yes, we may all be immigrants at one time but proud to say my ancestors came here LEGALLY and also proud to say they all worked for every bit of freedom that they had in America. …… So take your sign “You are an immigrant too and stop harassing me ” and put it where the sun don’t shine! Apparently in in the country you are fleeing from!! if you can’t do it legally then just don’t come!!!

    • My grandfather didn’t. Danish immigrant worked on a ship and jumped into the San Francisco Bay, swam ashore, met my grandmother who was a waitress in a restaurant. He did serve in WWII and was granted citizenship after that – before he was on the FBI list as a communist, but that’s another story.

      • Would a Humboldt County-wide sanctuary ordinance supersede the Plenary Power Doctrine in which Congress makes immigration laws and the Executive branch enforces such laws?

        Looking forward to the Points and Authorities on this.

        • No, because in every Sanctuary Ordinance I’ve read with a few exceptions there is a provision which states something like, “Nothing in this charter shall be construed in such a way as to render the ordinance in violation of any federal or state law.”

          This means if law requires local cooperation or involvement, it will happen. The sanctuary ordinances are mostly in response to the voluntary joint task forces in which local governments and agencies are expected to devote money, employee time, and resources without compensation from ICE or the federal government.

          As such, each ordinance challenged has been upheld in Court. At least on the federal primacy issues, particularly since states and localities are protected by the 10th Amendment.

          • Thinking allowed

            How convenient you have already interpreted that locals are not required to be involved in Federal jurisdiction cases. Of course unless they find it to their advantage to sic the big guns of the Feds on something that they find bothersome or difficult.

            You want it both ways. You want to tell the Feds to go or act but only when you want.

            As far as I can tell the only thing that the Federal government has asked is for holds on jailed illegals. When Sun Valley had their raid, it was all Federal immigration and IRS that did the deed after decades of the owner ignoring all the notices of invalid use of Social Security numbers.

            What sanctuary really seems to mean is that no local assistance will be given to stop that kind of activity. Because as far as I have ever heard only people involved in criminal activity or falsified ID for work or benefits have ever been bothered.

  • My Family came from Italy and had to go thru the process before they were U.S citizen’s and issued s.s cards!! They came right by MISS liberty and cried. They came here the right way,they didn’t sneak in.they worked hard all there lives,raised their families,payed their taxes,never cheated,hurt,robbed anyone! There’s a right way and a wrong way.we follow the laws that were made for all of us. I guess some people think their above everyone else.

    • G-MAS, nor did they come here to sign up for government benefits, because there were none. If you did not come here to work and work hard you pretty much died, unless your neighbors or a church took pity on you and help you out.

  • Both sides of my family immigrated my mom’s side Danish, and Swedish on my dad’s side my grand parents came from Finland, and quess what they went threw the imigration process ,and became american citizens.

  • It’s now crickets from @Eric Kirk

  • I used to think Wade Harris was bad until Erik Kirk sued me. One could argue that at least Wade Harris did something that might be considered work to get his ill gotten plunder

Leave a Reply

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