Thread: House to take up bill blocking money for 'sanctuary cities'

Jul 20, 8:58 PM (ET)

By ERICA WERNER

WASHINGTON (AP) — The House will take up a bill this week blocking funding for so-called "sanctuary cities" that resist turning over immigrants to federal authorities.

The move follows the shooting death of a woman in San Francisco this month, allegedly by an immigrant with a criminal record and without legal status.

San Francisco authorities had released the man despite a request from federal officials to keep him in custody.

That was in line with a practice by San Francisco and other jurisdictions that have begun refusing to cooperate with federal immigration orders amid concerns over their legality and their impact on immigrant communities.

The bill by Republican Congressman Duncan Hunter of California would block certain federal grants to cities that don't honor federal immigration requests.

A similar proposal has been advanced in the Senate, but it's unclear how far it will go.

The U.S. Conference of Mayors and the National League of Cities on Monday sent a letter to lawmakers protesting any such legislation. "We believe that decisions related to how law enforcement agencies prioritize their resources, direct their workforce and define the duties of their employees must reside with local government leadership," the letter reads. "This includes defining the role of local police officers in the context of enforcing federal immigration laws."

Meanwhile, the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday will hear from Jim Steinle, father of Kathryn Steinle, the 32-year-old woman who was shot in San Francisco. Steinle was walking with his daughter along a popular pier in daylight when the shooting happened.

The Archbishop of San Francisco sent a letter Monday urging the committee to "avoid the implementation of policies that punish all immigrants for the transgressions of a small minority."

"I applaud the commitment to public safety of the City of San Francisco and other local jurisdictions and support their right to exercise reasonable and appropriate discretion in the handling of immigrant detainees," Archbishop Salvatore J. Cordileone wrote. "A just and humanitarian policy should not be abandoned because of flaws in the system."

http://apnews.myway.com/article/2015...fa474a2f6.html

The Archbishop of San Francisco sent a letter Monday urging the committee to "avoid the implementation of policies that punish all immigrants for the transgressions of a small minority."

This is about illegal immigrants, not immigrants. Actually this doesn't punish anyone that follows the law. Furthermore, how can any individual of faith say that illegal immigrant criminals that prey on law abiding citizens shouldn't be held accountable for their actions?

Originally Posted by MW

This is about illegal immigrants, not immigrants. Actually this doesn't punish anyone that follows the law. Furthermore, how can any individual of faith say that illegal immigrant criminals that prey on law abiding citizens shouldn't be held accountable for their actions?

I agree MW, with you so much that my blood is running hot. Why would a letter from the Archbishop be pertinent in a nation whose Constitution demands a separation of church and state. Why would the Congress of that nation receive the Pope of the same religion. I am as disturbed over this as if I had caught the minister's son playing house with my wife! Oh, wait a minute, that occurred once, too. Mixing religion and politics was another republican fiasco.

by Caroline May
21 Jul 2015

The House is slated to consider legislation targeting sanctuary cities.

House leaders have scheduled a vote on the “Enforce the Law for Sanctuary Cities Act” this week, according to reports.

The bill, offered by Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA), would block federal law enforcement grants for jurisdictions that do not cooperate with federal immigration authorities.

“States and cities that refuse to enforce federal immigration laws directly undermine enforcement efforts and — as recent events have shown — present a real danger to citizens,” Hunter said in a statement to Breitbart News shortly before he introduced the bill. “If a state or one of its cities wants to call itself a sanctuary and deliberately ignore the law, then Congress shouldn’t hesitate to withhold federal funding until there’s compliance.”

The Obama administration has pushed back against attempts to force cities to comply with immigration law.

The bill comes in the wake of the murder of Kathryn Steinle, allegedly by a five-time deportee, multiple-felon, illegal immigrant after he was released due to San Francisco’s sanctuary city policies. Steinle was shot at a San Francisco pier this month.

Steinle’s father, Jim Steinle, testified Tuesday before a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...ary-city-bill/

The Davis-Oliver bill by Sen. Sessions (Steve King has one similar in the House) is much stronger and effective than the Hunter bill. Hunter's bill is to provide window dressing for the "See we did something." crowd's cover. Boehner I believe backs this one, so no more needs to be said.

Duncan Hunter tried to get his bill to be taken up for six years. He is one of the few Republicans representing California that is not a Rhino.

Originally Posted by kevinssdad

The Davis-Oliver bill by Sen. Sessions (Steve King has one similar in the House) is much stronger and effective than the Hunter bill. Hunter's bill is to provide window dressing for the "See we did something." crowd's cover. Boehner I believe backs this one, so no more needs to be said.

Have you read both bills? Just asking .......

Personally, I haven't read either bill.

The ArchBishop in this case is doing exactly what I keep pointing out to conservatives is regulated by federal law. He is interceding--i.e. lobbying--on behalf of 'foreign principals' and that is forbidden by federal law, unless you are a registered lobbyist. Of course, the GOP remains completely oblivious of this requirement, and Democrats who cried long and loud about American Jews doing that on behalf of Israel, hope that no one notices.

We are supposed to put US constituents first, and FYI there are federal laws to that effect. DOn't expect anyone in Congress to wake up to that fact, apparently.o

Originally Posted by Captainron

The ArchBishop in this case is doing exactly what I keep pointing out to conservatives is regulated by federal law. He is interceding--i.e. lobbying--on behalf of 'foreign principals' and that is forbidden by federal law, unless you are a registered lobbyist. Of course, the GOP remains completely oblivious of this requirement, and Democrats who cried long and loud about American Jews doing that on behalf of Israel, hope that no one notices.

We are supposed to put US constituents first, and FYI there are federal laws to that effect. DOn't expect anyone in Congress to wake up to that fact, apparently.o

I do not grasp why Americans whose nation was founded upon the principle of independence accept so much ignoring and breaking of American law by their government that leads only to the destruction of the principle!

There can be only two answers to that. The majority of Americans are purposely ignorant of what happens in their nation. It might be that the founders were of much more courage than Americans today. Neither answer should be acceptable behavior.

7/23/15

http://www.alipac.us/f12/house-passe...ies%92-321509/