Kenney stands by Philadelphia's 'sanctuary city' status

MICHAEL MATZA, INQUIRER STAFF WRITER
POSTED: Wednesday, July 29, 2015, 2:04 PM

Glistening with sweat at a Love Park rally Wednesday, Democratic mayoral nominee Jim Kenney said he would forego an estimated $5 to $6 million in federal funds to Philadelphia rather than adopt a law enforcement policy he believes violates the civil rights of immigrants.

"Money is important," he said. But it's not worth violating the Constitution. You can't pay me to violate the Constitution."

Pushing back against legislation that would withhold federal law-enforcement assistance from so-called "sanctuary cities," including Philadelphia, Kenney, several local officials and immigration activists denounced the movement in Congress to dock funding from the 22 cities that restrict local police cooperation with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

"I don't understand the difficulty with federal agencies who have all of the capacity to get a judge to sign a warrant not to want to sign a warrant," Kenney told the assembled group of about two dozen. "If we have a warrant, we hold them. If they don't feel it necessary to get one, we can't hold somebody against their will according to the Constitution."

Lobbing a pun at Republican presidential contender Donald Trump's recent remarks denigrating immigrants who arrive illegally from Mexico as "killers" and "rapists," Kenney said: "As far as I know the Constitution trumps, trumps ICE and any of [its] regulations and requests."

The Congressional attack on sanctuary cities was revived this month against the backdrop of the recent murder of a San Francisco woman. An immigrant man who had been deported multiple times is in custody for her shooting.

In April 2014, Mayor Nutter signed an executive order amending the city's policy regarding U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement requests to hold prisoners who would otherwise be released so that ICE can detain them.

"Initially, the purpose of ICE detainers . . . was to enhance the federal government's ability to apprehend dangerous criminals who enter the country illegally," Nutter said. "But in practice, many of those being detained have no criminal background or have only committed misdemeanors."

Under the amendment, no one in city custody is released to ICE unless the person was convicted of a crime of violence and the detainer request is supported by a judicial warrant.

In a statement released after the rally, Republican mayoral nominee Melissa Murray Bailey, said: "On issues of safety, I feel Philadelphia must act with common sense and cooperate with the federal government to make sure our streets are safe for everyone. To Jim Kenney I ask, 'Why do you feel the city of Philadelphia should put the safety of our children and fellow citizens in jeopardy by ignoring federal authorities and releasing potentially dangerous criminals back onto the street?'"

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20...t__status.html

Unfortunately, Philadelphia has politicians that have never asked the citizens if they WANT their city to be a sanctuary for illegals - it would be an overwhelming NO - so they just took it upon themselves to declare it. 4x property tax raised to pay for schooling the illegals' multitude of anchor babies. 5th largest city in the USA, filled with history and culture and they GIVE it away!

Kenney makes no mention of BREAKING immigration laws - of endangering our citizens - of our job losses to illegals, drivers licenses galore, NO HEALTH OR CRIMINAL CHECKS - he thinks all that is OK!!! Shows no appreciation for or desire to protect the citizens too.

Quote:

---

"I don't understand the difficulty with federal agencies who have all of the capacity to get a judge to sign a warrant not to want to sign a warrant," Kenney told the assembled group of about two dozen. "If we have a warrant, we hold them. If they don't feel it necessary to get one, we can't hold somebody against their will according to the Constitution."

---

What is wrong with you? Everyone you hold is holding them against their will. You hold all types of people who have violated our laws, that is hopefully why you have them in custody. When you arrest someone who has violated US immigration law, you have a Constitutional Obligation to hold them until ICE picks them up or you remove them from the country yourselves, which under the US Constitution, you certainly have the authority to do under the clauses that protect and reserve power to the States.

I can't believe we have such a bunch of idiots in our country running for or already serving in public office. Like I posted on another thread, none of these political morons are the answer to our situation.

We need a new plan, our own plan that doesn't involve politicians. And we need it in a hurry.

: http://constitution.findlaw.com/arti....U39l2U9o.dpuf
Article IV. Section 4:The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence. -

This section is called the Guarantee Clause, because by its terms the federal government makes certain guarantees to the states. One of these—protection from foreign invasion—continued Congress's prior obligation under the Articles of Confederation. This guarantee is a part of the larger doctrine, reflected in both the Articles and the Constitution, that although the federation may be decentralized internally, it is to have a common foreign policy and present a unified face to the outside world.