Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: The ties that bind
Next Post: Not gonna be a Rome “reset” for Rauner and Madigan
Posted in:
* Sunday afternoon press release…
Mayor Rahm Emanuel today reiterated Chicago’s commitment to being a sanctuary city for immigrants and announced the city’s 311 operators have been given special instruction to assist anyone with concerns or questions about their status in Chicago or the United States.
“Since the Presidential Election, there has been a sense of uncertainty among many immigrant communities in Chicago and across the nation. I want to assure all of our families that Chicago is and will remain a Sanctuary City,” said Mayor Emanuel. “Chicago has been a city of immigrants since it was founded. We have always welcomed people of all faiths and backgrounds, and while the administration will change, our values and our commitment to inclusion will not.”
Residents are encouraged to call 311 for information about legal resources, as well as other supportive services. Families can also learn more about Chicago’s upcoming Municipal ID program by calling 311. Under a provision in the Mayor’s recently announced budget, the City will begin issuing Municipal IDs in late 2017 to ensure all Chicago residents have access to official identification. Community meetings will be scheduled throughout next year to provide more information.
* Greg Hinz…
The statement neither mentions Trump by name nor his suggestions on the campaign trail that “sanctuary cites” such as Chicago that do not help him crack down on illegal immigration could lose billions of dollars in federal spending. Nor does the statement mention the political reality that, as Emanuel begins to consider whether to run for a third term, being perceived as championing the rights of one of the city’s key voting blocks could be helpful.
New York and Los Angeles took similar steps a few days ago.
Adam Collins, the mayor’s spokesman, said the statement should be read as meaning that all city services will be provided to residents regardless of their immigration status, and that the city will not collect or furnish information to federal immigration authorities.
“This is less about anyone in Washington than ensuring people who live in Chicago feel safe,” Collins told me. “The mayor personally and many people in Chicago have certain values. Those values need to be defended.”
Collins said he did not immediately know how the policy would apply to those arrested for committing crimes.
* Politico…
In sanctuary cities, local law enforcement officials aren’t required to alert U.S. Immigration and Customs authorities about the immigration status of individuals with whom they come in contact.
On Monday, Chicago’s elected officials, including Mayor Rahm Emanuel, are expected to hold a news conference to formally discuss how the city will retain its sanctuary status. Aldermen are expected to call on Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner to pressure Trump to back off his vow to interfere with funding. […]
Illinois Comptroller-elect Susana Mendoza, whose parents are Mexican immigrants, called on Rauner to take a stand on the issue.
“As a leader of this state, the governor, and everyone in a leadership position, should be saying it’s wrong,” Mendoza told POLITICO Illinois on Sunday. “I would expect that the governor would say, ‘that’s ridiculous.’ Besides moral bankruptcy, it’s bad fiscal policy for the city or any city.
* Tribune…
Democratic U.S. Rep. Mike Quigley worries President-elect Donald Trump could use Chicago’s status as a sanctuary city for undocumented immigrants to cut off funding to the city.
Quigley addressed the issue on WLS-AM 890’s “Connected to Chicago” show after host Bill Cameron asked whether he’s concerned about Trump trying to cut off the federal funding spigot to Chicago.
“The president-elect said he would cut off all federal funding to sanctuary cities — an extraordinary thing to say, particularly for someone who says the federal government should stay out of the local governing of states and cities,” Quigley said.
“Am I concerned about it from that point of view? Absolutely,” Quigley added. “In the final analysis, though, I think if the president wants to do what he talks about, for example with a big infrastructure package, he’s going to need support across the aisle. And if he says none for Chicago, he’s not going to get any support from anybody in Chicago, frankly in the Chicagoland area.”
* NBC 5…
Mental health hotlines across the state have received an influx of calls since Trump was elected to be the nation’s 45th president, according to the Illinois Business Immigration Coalition.
“It’s scary,” said one concerned resident, Leslie Alcantar. “It feels like they could take my mom, my dad, my family.” […]
“Us hard workers, we come in illegally but we do work and that’s what he doesn’t understand,” said Tanya Govea, who lives in Chicago’s Little Village neighborhood. “If we’re not doing the jobs Americans don’t want to do, who’s going to do it?”
*** UPDATE *** Press release…
Throughout this year’s presidential campaign, Governor Rauner never officially endorsed Donald Trump as the Republican nominee, and did not attend the Republican National Convention. Less than forty percent of Illinois voters supported Mr. Trump, a clear rejection of his anti-immigrant proposals. Now, Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (ICIRR) members are calling on Governor Rauner to listen to his state’s voters, reject the President-elect’s anti-immigrant rhetoric and policies, and use his executive authority and leadership to actively advance protections for immigrants before Mr. Trump is inaugurated on January 20, 2017.
“The country just elected the most dangerous and racist president in recent history. Now is the time for local leadership to show that Illinois stands for something different,” said ICIRR board president Mony Ruiz-Velasco. “Voters in Illinois rejected Donald Trump’s anti-immigrant, misogynistic, anti-LGBTQ and xenophobic rhetoric. The governor now has a responsibility to act against Trump’s racist agenda, and advance the best interests of Illinois residents.
ICIRR members established an “Illinois Is Safe” agenda for Illinois. The Coalition is calling on the Governor to take the following actions immediately as the General Assembly reconvenes for its veto session this week:
Immediately issue an executive order designating public schools and universities “sanctuary spaces” for undocumented individuals in Illinois. Such an order would restrict officers from the Department of Homeland Security from entering “sensitive locations” included schools, places of worship and hospitals. (See https://www.ice.gov/doclib/ero-outreach/pdf/10029.2-policy.pdf)
Endorse and encourage support for House passage of the Student Access Bill (SB 2196) and sign the bill when it reaches his desk. The bill provides legal authority to four-year public universities in Illinois to provide financial aid to undocumented students who enroll at their institutions. This bill addresses educational access, a centerpiece issue of his administration. SB 2196 passed out of the Senate, and is expected to come up for a vote during veto session in the House
Use his national leadership within the Republican Party to call on President-elect Trump to maintain the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) executive order. DACA protects over 740,000 young people from deportation, including over 41,000 in Illinois with many more immigrants eligible for the program who have yet to apply. DACA grants recipients work permits and allows them to contribute to the country’s tax base. Studies have concluded that the DACA program would increase the country’s Gross Domestic Product by hundreds of billions of dollars. The Social Security Administration has estimated that the program would increase tax revenue by billions of dollars. The policy is good for Illinois’ residents and economy.ICIRR also calls on the Governor to work in good faith with Senate and House legislatures to seek bipartisan support to protect Illinois immigrants by taking the following steps in response to the Trump administration’s priorities as soon as possible:
Support legislation to ensure that Illinois law enforcement officials are not involved in immigration enforcement. Such legislation would ensure that local law enforcement agencies do not honor burdensome and legally suspect requests from U.S Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to detain people for deportation who have otherwise been granted release by the state and municipal courts.
Propose legislation to ban private immigration detention centers in Illinois. Private prison companies have made several proposals to build in Illinois, most recently in Kankakee County. Each such proposal has been met with vociferous local resistance due to the long history of abuse, neglect, and profiteering among private facilities. Legislation is needed to bar these prisons altogether.
Work with our member organizations and other criminal justice reform allies to craft and enact sentencing reforms that limit the deportation consequences of interactions with the criminal justice system in Illinois.“Governor Rauner has publicly supported a national immigration reform agenda,” observed ICIRR Executive Director Lawrence Benito. “He refused to join other GOP governors in suing the Obama administration regarding its pro-immigrant executive actions. On November 9, we entered a new era where more is required of all of us. Now is the time for the Governor to meet this moment and act on the principles that Illinois voters unequivocally supported in this year’s elections”
ICIRR members will be in Springfield throughout the fall veto session to advance these priorities.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:43 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: The ties that bind
Next Post: Not gonna be a Rome “reset” for Rauner and Madigan
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Good, glad Emanuel is taking a stand.
Comment by Biker Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:46 am
President Elect Trump has said he wants to secure the border and remove or incarcerate the criminal undocumented immigrants.
In Chicago, there is a huge drug trade driven in large part by undocumented immigrants. I would think law enforcement would want to use all tools available to deal with these people, similar to using the IRS to go after Capone.
Comment by Lucky Pierre Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:48 am
Lucky Pierre
Quite a claim. Normally you at least give an effort to mask your ignorance.
Comment by AlfondoGonz Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:54 am
LP, you might want to augment your robotic talking points with facts and reality….. but I doubt it.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obamas-deportation-policy-numbers/story?id=41715661
http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/11/19/more-mexicans-leaving-than-coming-to-the-u-s/
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:56 am
It’s beyond “extraordinary,” it’s unconstitutional.
The precedent: a 10% cut to highway funding for state alcohol laws is not coercive (South Dakota v. Dole); a 10% cut for entire state budget for not implementing ACA Medicaid expansion is coercive (NFIB v. Sebelius).
Comment by Tier 2 Employee Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:59 am
http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/16/us/chapo-guzman-sinaloa-chicago-drugs/
AlfondoGonz some reading you might enjoy
Comment by Lucky Pierre Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:05 am
be sure to differentiate how to deal with criminals…as in people who commit violent /heinous acts…. vs. people who have not come to the US legally. I have zero compassion for those who commit crimes against persons, whatever their status. those who are not here legally may be afraid to report a crime, and that is a bad thing as we need everyone to be on watch. But those who are here whatever their legal status who commit crimes, they should be prosecuted and that is something everyone can get behind.
Comment by Amalia Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:07 am
Isn’t there a significant difference between highway funding, medicaid funding and federal authority over immigration? To me, the former is discretionary. Federal authority over immigration is the law! Those who wanted to stop Arizona proved that in Court, right? Chicago can’t afford to loose federal funding for law enforcement and become more dangerous just because Rahm wants to get reelected. Those same forces will work against him anyway come election time and what will be accomplished? If you don’t like the law, work to change it!
Comment by blogman Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:11 am
Under GATA, all it takes is one federal agency to declare that a local/state governmental agency is in violation of federal laws/rules and all federal funds are cut off.
Comment by Huh? Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:15 am
I believe there’s room to decide for whom the city is a Sanctuary to. If laws assist in deporting criminals of illegal status; it would seem it would provide some additional protection for people of good will who are law abiding, but not of legal status.
Comment by A guy Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:17 am
Immigration is a Federal issue. Rahm is a mayor. Trump calls the shots. Considering Chicago’s needs financially, the City is in no place to withstand the pressure of ignoring Federal law.
Rahm’s stand won’t stand for long, but it feels nice at this juncture.
Comment by VanillaMan Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:17 am
Maybe the City of Chicago could start by rescinding their petty action to “unname” Donald Trump Avenue by Trump Tower?
Just saying.
Comment by Louis G. Atsaves Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:19 am
Lucky Pierre
If that’s the best you’ve got, than I think we’re done here. You take a peek at wordslinger’s links?
Comment by AlfondoGonz Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:20 am
also this is Trump’s response to Obama’s identical threat to pull federal funding over transgender issues with NC and others. it’s a real thing from Trump, and perhaps the biggest serious issue that Chicago and other places will have to face.
Comment by Amalia Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:22 am
Elections have consequences.
Illegal immigration was a hot button issue. Part of the frustration fueling the fire was that properly passed immigration laws were not enforced.
Does a city ordnance refusing to comply with a Federal law itself constitute a crime? Is Rahm researching John C. Calhoun’s writings on nullification?
I hope we can develop a solution that does not involve mass deportations. But this is not a civil rights issue where state laws that violate Federal Constitutional rights are being challenged.
Comment by Last Bull Moose Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:24 am
“The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States’ officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program. It matters not whether policymaking is involved, and no case by case weighing of the burdens or benefits is necessary; such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty.” — Antonin Scalia (Printz v. United States)
Comment by Tier 2 Employee Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:24 am
Look, Donald has a pen and a phone….the precedents set in the last 8 years are coming home to roost.
Comment by Doug Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:26 am
Nullification went out as a legitimate policy tool with John C. Calhoun and the Civil War. Cities have no right to violate federal law. Not only should federal funding be pulled, but elected officials arrested if they conspire to violate our county’s immigration laws.
Comment by Downstate Illinois Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:26 am
AlfondoGonz and Wordslinger, if you are trying to assure us that all of the illegal drug trade from Mexico and the violent crime that accompanies it is gone, and those that worry about it are reciting “robotic talking points” I am afraid you have failed.
I guess Wordslinger believes all the violent, foreign born criminals have decided to leave the country on their own.
Comment by Lucky Pierre Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:28 am
Lucky Pierre
I can’t begin to understand how you’ve come to gather that from mine and wordslinger’s comments.
Comment by AlfondoGonz Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:37 am
Whether or not sanctuary cities is a good policy, the issue is whether President Trump will follow through on his promise to punish cities that don’t abandon the policy. My guess is if he backs off, his loyalists will accept it, just as they will on not locking her up.
Comment by anon Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:41 am
Tier 2 Employee
Thanks for the quote from Scalia. Do the immigration laws qualify as a federal regulatory program? It seems to me that they would be different than regulations drawn up by an Agency in compliance with a law.
Comment by Last Bull Moose Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:42 am
“If we’re not doing the jobs Americans don’t want to do, who’s going to do it?
Maybe something crazy will happen like employers will have to raise wages and improve working conditions so Americans will do those jobs. It might be worth a try I don’t know.
Comment by jeffinginchicago Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:45 am
It’s quite amusing that Democrats were shrieking “Immigration is a federal issue!” when states like Arizona were trying to enfore the immigration laws that the Obama admin refused to enforce. But now that there will be someone in the White House to enforce immigration law, it’s suddenly a local issue….
Comment by DGD Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:48 am
IANAL, but my understanding is: State/local enforcement of federal law is essentially voluntary. If the federal government wishes to enforce federal law, it can (a) use federal agents to do so; or (b) incentivize the state/local policies with the “power of the purse.” But the latter cannot be coercive, which a 100% cut to federal funding would be, and incentives are supposed to relate to the specific policies the federal government desires, which an across the board cut would not.
Comment by Tier 2 Employee Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:51 am
Amalia - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:22 am:
You are one of the more astute political observers and consistently fair analysts on this site. It’s noticed and appreciated by many.
Comment by Responsa Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:52 am
– Amalia - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:22 am:
You are one of the more astute political observers and consistently fair analysts on this site. It’s noticed and appreciated by many. –
Agreed. Threats to pull funding and “if Congress won’t act, I will” set precedents. Be careful what you do, because in time it will be used against you.
Comment by Ron Burgundy Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:58 am
Trump will have a pen and a phone, as well as the House and Senate and the Supreme Court as well. I am sure you will see the sanctuary city issue bubble up through the Courts, especially because they are in such blue areas.
Comment by Lucky Pierre Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:58 am
Hey Illinois, New York, California go ahead break federal laws, hey all illegal Latinos living in those heavily Democratic Blue states there are consequences to election results in our country, just like Obama said when he passed Obamacare.
By the way let’s get them all to start carrying auto insurance, it’s the law.
Comment by Aces over Deuces Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:58 am
===By the way let’s get them all to start carrying auto insurance===
So they can safely deport themselves?
Snark aside, Illinois has a law for undocumented immigrants to allow them to get licenses and insurance. Most folks who opposed illegal immigration also opposed that law. Ironic that you’re calling for it now.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 11:00 am
** Most folks who opposed illegal immigration **
Most people do oppose illegal immigration, or they should.
Comment by DGD Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 11:08 am
“all illegal Latinos living in those heavily Democratic Blue states there are consequences to election results in our country”
Shouldn’t this line of scolding be reserved for those who can vote?
Comment by Tier 2 Employee Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 11:11 am
Amalia is 100% correct. Utilizing the power of the federal government to impact state’s and city’s rights/funding is nothing new.
I would assume that under a Trump presidency that there are some states’s attorneys general who may sue cities that continue or institute sanctuary cities. For example: St. Louis is not currently listed as a sanctuary city. But if Mayor Slay decides to try for that designation then new Missouri AG Josh Hawley may take action knowing that a Trump Administration and Republican-leaning Supreme Court would back his actions.
Comment by Team Sleep Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 11:11 am
@Responsa and @Ron Burgundy Thank you. I try to sit in the middle and view fairly and often get hit from both sides. and disagree with many, including both of you, from time to time. but that is what collaboration is about….not staying entrenched and listening. I’m a Hillary Democrat and I still believe the middle way is the way.
speaking of the middle, one bit about the statement from ICIRR that is troubling to me, restricting where Homeland Security can go. As a person who wishes the Swedish authorities could get into the Ecuadorian Embassy and take accused sexual assault jerk (and danger to US safety) Assange, I’m all for terrorists getting hunted down. and I don’t like HSecurity being limited.
Comment by Amalia Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 11:14 am
Significant federal funding for state/local law enforcement has already been blocked for sanctuary cities under President Obama. So it’s really not a question whether this can be done at all, but to what extent can it be done legally.
(Sorry if this is already known by everyone, but it’s not obvious from the comments.)
Comment by Tier 2 Employee Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 11:32 am
did I hear the news report correct about some person at the Rahm/Luis presser on this issue slamming them saying that they SHOULD provide sanctuary for those who commit crimes? don’t you see how that is NOT the issue, cannot be the issue, contributes to the Alt Right/incorrect version of the overwhelming majority of the people who are not here legally? stop it. you are doing the dreamers no favors.
Comment by Amalia Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 11:52 am
Not all illegal are latiino. Is the next step racial profiling? Grow up immigration in all its forms bring value to this Nation; The sadness when you see a family broken up because of chance; wrong birthplace is just WRONG. Read Miller’s A view from the bridge. Remember the intermittent is that what we want to go back to..These battles were fought why repeat them. Trump sadly brought this fear and loathing and jealousy to the us that does not mean we should accept it. Be brave and stand up for what is right. Emmanuel will be supported by the city. And for those for deportation imagine the Nation with just one less person that you know and respect . And ask how is the nation served by this deportation action.
Comment by Ex Spsa Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 12:00 pm
Why does it even matter if a city is labeled “sanctuary city.” If ICE wants to find people and deport them, they will, whether the it’s a “sanctuary city” or not.
Comment by BK Bro Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 12:07 pm
@BKBro, well, ICE works with local law enforcement, so one hopes that hey will work together on criminals and some see Sanctuary as prohibiting that. as evidenced by today’s dreamer statement (i know, not all dreamers….) at the Rahm presser, there seems to be a thought out there that Chicago should be a place where they cannot be touched. including actual criminals. problem.
Comment by Amalia Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 12:17 pm
While I support Trump’s intent to defund sanctuary cities, I do find it to be a huge double standard. Yes, sanctuary cities are violating federal law but so are states with legalized or even medicinal marijuana laws as marijuana is also banned at the federal level. It might be just talk too but consistency in executing federal law would be nice. Either “we’re a nation of laws” or we are not.
Comment by LGHB Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 12:18 pm
A bit off topic, but the charges against Trump should have some basis in fact.
“Donald Trump’s anti-immigrant, misogynistic, anti-LGBTQ and xenophobic rhetoric…”
I can see how his rhetoric has been against all of these except LGBTQ, although I suspect we will see much more tempered statements now. But to say Trump is against the LGBTQ is plain false. In fact, do a google search and you’ll find he’s been talked of as one of the most pro-LGBTQ Republicans ever. And since the election he said that same sex marriage is the law of the land and we need to move on.
Comment by phocion Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 12:29 pm
If large numbers of illegal immigrants leave before the 2020 census, that will affect redistricting. Illinois could lose relative to the rest of the country.
Comment by Last Bull Moose Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 12:33 pm
Still laughing! And it keeps coming. Now it’s a lefty mayor being a defiant child. This popcorn is great!
Comment by Beeker Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 12:48 pm
‘“This is less about anyone in Washington than ensuring people who live in Chicago feel safe,” Collins told me.’
It would make me feel safer if I knew that illegal aliens who are criminals were being deported. There are sufficient native born criminals in our state, why do we need more?
In addition, in Illinois the average annual cost per inmate in state prisons is about $38K, far more than the cost of a first class airline ticket from Chicago to anywhere on earth. Deporting illegal aliens who are criminals looks like a win-win situation for Illinois taxpayers to me.
Comment by Illinois Native Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 12:55 pm
Immigration does not always benefit the original inhabitants of a country or region. Ask Montezuma, Chief Pontiac, or the Arab Palestinians living in Gaza.
For centuries we benefited from living in a country where natural resources were plentiful and labor was scarce. And it was hard for people to get to us.
We no longer live in that world. Our policies need to fit this time, not the world of 100 years ago.
Comment by Last Bull Moose Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 1:08 pm
So what happens to illegal immigrants now if they are arrested for a crime? Do they make their way through the legal system and end in US jails?
Comment by BK Bro Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 2:28 pm
If Trump means end Federal Grants to Sanctuary Cities that could be a big problem. The ‘16 budget overview shows $1.25 Billion in Fed Grants on the revenue side (p34) that feeds into dozens of — wait for it — social service programs that are already hanging by a thread (p145). So it will hurt more than just Rahm, it will devastate legal law-abiding citizens that need help.
I may be looking at the wrong pages. Or the wrong document?
https://www.cityofchicago.org/content/dam/city/depts/obm/supp_info/2016Budget/2016BudgetOverviewCoC.pdf
Comment by Touré's Latte Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 2:41 pm
Over a billion in Fed Grants withheld blows serious holes in several social service programs and hits far more than criminal illegals.
Comment by Touré's Latte Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 2:44 pm
If the Feds finally make good on the threat to cut funds to sanctuary cities that refuse to cooperate with ICE, this is going to be an expensive political pandering job by Rahm.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 3:47 pm
–Immigration does not always benefit the original inhabitants of a country or region. Ask Montezuma, Chief Pontiac, or the Arab Palestinians living in Gaza.
For centuries we benefited from living in a country where natural resources were plentiful and labor was scarce. And it was hard for people to get to us.
We no longer live in that world. Our policies need to fit this time, not the world of 100 years ago. –
What in the world are you talking about? Is that a gag?
So, the “original inhabitants” of North America should be running the show, instead of the “immigrants?”
That’s a heavy lift. At the very least, I’m sure President Nieto would love to discuss the return to the “original inhabitants” of the West Coast, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Colorado…..
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 3:49 pm
Who knew Chicago wanted more criminals?
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 3:56 pm
Wordslinger
Not a gag and not claiming that original inhabitants are supposed to be in charge forever. Countering the argument that immigration always benefits everyone.
When people move, there are usually both winners and losers. This election many American voters decided that illegal immigration was working against them.
Elections have consequences and so do wars. Not arguing to reverse the results.
Comment by Last Bull Moose Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 4:28 pm
- anon - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:41 am:
Whether or not sanctuary cities is a good policy, the issue is whether President Trump will follow through on his promise to punish cities that don’t abandon the policy. My guess is if he backs off, his loyalists will accept it, just as they will on not locking her up.”
And not build a wall.
Comment by Ron Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 4:43 pm
“Arab Palestinians living in Gaza”
The original inhabitants of that area were jews.
Comment by Ron Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 4:44 pm
–I guess Wordslinger believes all the violent, foreign born criminals have decided to leave the country on their own. –
Whoa, don’t dazzle me with the big-guns logic and facts there.
If you believe that drug dealers who are here illegally haven’t been prosecuted or deported until now then you’re just willfully ignorant, Tobor.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 5:25 pm
Ron. Depends on how far back you go. Also, some Jews converted to Christianity and some to Islam.
Comment by Last Bull Moose Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 6:44 pm
Didn’t read the post, but Rahmn very well may be out of touch with Dems in the city. The loss of jobs affects all people, not ones of color only.
Rahmn, holding on to his Mayoral seat, had a difficult pervious election. Giving/manintaining sanctuary may be his way of receiving Trump’s free campaign advertising.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Nov 15, 16 @ 8:53 am