Sanctuary Cities and Workplaces and Elected Officials Obstructing Justice

[NorseThing]

The Department of Justice is looking into whether Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf obstructed justice by warning Northern California residents of an impending raid by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).




The agency’s acting director, Thomas Homan, told “Fox & Friends” Wednesday morning that the DOJ is “reviewing” whether Schaaf broke any laws by telling her constituents ICE would be raiding the area in order to arrest people violating federal immigration laws.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018...-ice-raid.html

Read the rest of the article at the link.

This is something of a new twist on a story which has long since become old and tired. In the Sanctuary State of California you can find many Sanctuary Cities, all of whom are busily thinking up ways to “fight Trump” by refusing to enforce the nation’s laws. But now the city of Oakland has really upped their game to the next level. Why leave all of this lawlessness in the hands of the elected officials when you can privatize the system of lawbreaking? That’s right… they’ve moved to formally endorse private workplaces who choose to violate the law. (CBS local)

As the battle grows over sanctuary cities, a resolution passed by the Oakland City Council Tuesday night urges employers to refrain from voluntarily working with immigration officials…
Outside Tuesday’s meeting, immigrant rights groups rallied outside City Hall, calling for protections for immigrant employees.
“We want to make sure that the employer doesn’t work with ICE or immigration when they come to the worksites. That the companies don’t do self-audits and that workers are able to work without fear,” an advocate said.
Oakland City Councilmember Abel Guillen introduced the measure calling for “sanctuary workplaces, where workers are respected and not discriminated against or threatened based on their immigration status.”

https://hotair.com/archives/2017/04/...ry-workplaces/

Like the first, you can read more at the link.

Sanctuary cities is not new idea. Sanctuary workplaces may be just a variation on a theme. But how should such political tactics be countered? The latest is the DOJ looking at obstruction of justice charges against politicians that are literally getting in the way of ICE agents doing their lawful jobs. On the books. No need to tear apart the legislative branch to find a 'solution' to this issue. Now if the sanctuary city crowd wants to change things -- how about looking to change the laws and not obstruct. This is just the left saying we will ignore all laws with which we disagree. This is not like Gandhi as a private citizen with civil disobedience. This is elected officials in their elected capacity obstructing justice.

[athanaric]

This is not like Gandhi as a private citizen with civil disobedience. This is elected officials in their elected capacity obstructing justice.

The problem is, they think they're Gandhi. There are few things scarier than people without even a shred of self-doubt acting out their moral fantasies.
To paraphrase the great German philosopher Dieter Bohlen, try telling an imbecile that he's imbecilic.

[antaeus]

The problem is, they think they're Gandhi. There are few things scarier than people without even a shred of self-doubt acting out their moral fantasies.
To paraphrase the great German philosopher Dieter Bohlen, try telling an imbecile that he's imbecilic.

But aren't those officials responding in kind to officials who are also acting without self doubt based on moral positions?

It's almost like they WANT to secede...

But what they are doing is very illegal, I don't see how they wouldn't be sacked in any other civil role, assisting 'illegal aliens' as they say to breach the laws of the land.

And the taxpayer is paying for it.

It's not as black and white as just 'illegal' aliens. For example, the 'dreamers' have already been given a legal status that is under debate.

The US is federal. Some powers are devolved. These cities and states are acting in what they see as their best interests. They have the power to do it otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation. There has always been tension between local and federal government. The system is designed that way.

In most cases these sanctuaries are also the places most affected by illegal immigration, so they can make the argument that this is entirely what the federal part of US government is about. Dealing with local issues more effectively than a central government which also represents far flung populations not affected in the same way. It's no different at all to what happened under Obama where in particular southern and midwestern states and cities challenged Washington repeatedly. The issues are relative - The fact that Washington can be challenged even when the same party controls both Capital Hill and the Whitehouse is healthy and it is part of the checks and balances which prevent the US becoming a dictatorship...

So, much like I had no real concern about states in the south challenging Obama (even when I disagreed with them politically), I have no problem with these places challenging Trump so long as they are using tools and mechanisms built into the system - that includes the ability to spoil and obstruct through process. No true small government republican should have trouble agreeing with the principle of devolved power - and therefore devolved ways of dealing with local problems.

I wish they'd stop shouting 'illegal' like a baby throwing their toys and start shouting 'frustrating' which is what it really is for them. Being frustrating isn't breaking the law, it's being frustrating.

[Kraut]

the great German philosopher Dieter Bohlen

Priceless!

+rep for you

[Aexodus]

It's almost like they WANT to secede...

But what they are doing is very illegal, I don't see how they wouldn't be sacked in any other civil role, assisting 'illegal aliens' as they say to breach the laws of the land.

And the taxpayer is paying for it.

[Admiral Piett]

The culture war is becoming intolerable. It's severely hindering the legislature and now it's hindering something as basic as law enforcement. The progressives on the west coast and parts of New England will not be happy until they've achieved some sort of quasi democratic socialist state especially one with very transparent borders. I've drifted a bit more to the left lately on some issues but California takes this too far. I am for a path to citizenship to those who have been here over 10 years but we need to secure the border.

[Exarch]

This is treason, they deserve the death penalty

[Gaidin]

This is treason, they deserve the death penalty

That's...

[Exarch]

If the executive issues an order and bureacrats fail to comply by intent or design, then they must be made an example of; nothing gets obediance by crucifying some recalcitrant bureacrats.

[Gaidin]

If the executive issues an order and bureacrats fail to comply by intent or design, then they must be made an example of; nothing gets obediance by crucifying some recalcitrant bureacrats.

Federal employees are following presidential orders, the ones relevant to their agencies anyway. The mayor of Oakland doesn't work for the President(she isn't a bureaucrat anyway, she's a politician who has her own bureaucrats working for her in the city). And Treason just doesn't mean what you think it means.

[Exarch]

Federal employees are following presidential orders, the ones relevant to their agencies anyway. The mayor of Oakland doesn't work for the President(she isn't a bureaucrat anyway, she's a politician who has her own bureaucrats working for her in the city). And Treason just doesn't mean what you think it means.

LOL no wonder anglo america is in decline; let me tell you something: if President Trump wanted to get his orders carried out and not be screwed over by rebels, he should impale a few of these troublemakers to get the point across. Even Stalin knew how to get done, but it appears america's leaders still lack the balls to do what's necessary.

[Gaidin]

LOL no wonder anglo america is in decline; let me tell you something: if President Trump wanted to get his orders carried out and not be screwed over by rebels, he should impale a few of these troublemakers to get the point across. Even Stalin knew how to get done, but it appears america's leaders still lack the balls to do what's necessary.

This is you not knowing how the push and pull of the different levels of American government works.

[Exarch]

This is you not knowing how the push and pull of the different levels of American government works.

Sounds to me like you don't know how modern politics works; of course sometimes you'll get a few american politicians who use assassination and blackmail to get their way but the only way for the Executive to force the rest of the government to obey orders is to make a few examples and torture and kill traitors, the same way some US officials did to Manning and muslim americans.

President Trump is a stronger leader than obama who was so weak he couldnt stop the CIA and Pentagon from waging private war against each other, but he's not doing enough. Back in Medieval times, they used to behead corrupt officials and place them on pikes outside the town square. I don't see american leaders doing that because they lack the cojones to do what's necessary.

[L'Afrique]

American right, 2015: FEDERALISM CONSTITUTION STATES RIGHTS EXECUTIVE ORDERS ARE TYRANNY

American right, 2018: EXECUTE ALL TRAITORS PRESIDENT WORD IS LAW

I guess federalism, the constitution, states' rights, and devolution of powers can go into the same bucket as executive orders, national debt, and cops shooting folks: only ok when done by right wingers

[Heathen Hammer]

American right, 2015: FEDERALISM CONSTITUTION STATES RIGHTS EXECUTIVE ORDERS ARE TYRANNY

American right, 2018: EXECUTE ALL TRAITORS PRESIDENT WORD IS LAW

I guess federalism, the constitution, states' rights, and devolution of powers can go into the same bucket as executive orders, national debt, and cops shooting folks: only ok when done by right wingers

Same kind of accusation can be made towards the left, with its fantasies of massacring "racist rural rednecks" (just read the thread about Bundy standoff) under Obama quickly being replace with a desire to start an insurrection of their own.
In the long run, liberal left's separatism isn't really a bad thing. Would US lose much if progressives would establish some kind of neo-Soviet republic in California? Granted, it would end up like any other socialist failed state, but its example would probably turn the rest of Trump's presidency into an easy ride where any opposition to him could be countered with a glaring example of what happens when you give these people total political power.

[antaeus]

Same kind of accusation can be made towards the left

Exactly. No more needs to be said. There is no moral high ground when everyone debates in hyperbole.

California wont become Nueva Suecia anytime soon. They'll just spoil and spoil until their favoured candidate is in the White House. Then it's Texas' turn to play spoiler. The rest is just stupid people arguing on the internet.

[Exarch]

the President is elected by the people, the President is the voice of the people. If any mandarins in government thinkthey can subvert the will of the people they must be taught justice. I suggest flaying several of these rebellious bureacrats to teach them a lesson.

[Gaidin]

Again. The mayor doesn’t work for the federal government. This is hard for you to process in your moral hellhole but you’ll have to get the hell over it.

[athanaric]

Again. The mayor doesn’t work for the federal government.

Yes, but isn't she in violation of federal law (undermining the work of a federal agency on purpose)? If so, somebody should be able to press charges.

[Gaidin]

Yes, but isn't she in violation of federal law (undermining the work of a federal agency on purpose)? If so, somebody should be able to press charges.

Somebody should be able to investigate. Which they are. If they think they can make a case, by all means(I'm sure the mayor of Oakland would love to be a political martyr, as politicians live for these opportunities). But that wasn't what I was addressing.