Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Trump to hit cities funding for sanctuary


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Trump to hit cities funding for sanctuary Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Trump to hit cities funding for sanctuary - 11/18/2016 8:02:08 AM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline 		Seems there is a war between the feds and cities brewing.

Because states and cities can't be required to enforce federal law, and there's no U.S. requirement that police ask about a person's immigration status, it's likely that any Trump effort to crack down on sanctuary cities would focus on those that refuse to comply with ICE requests, said Roy Beck, chief executive of NumbersUSA, which wants to see immigration levels reduced.

It's also unclear what money Trump might pull. For Congress to impose conditions on federal money heading to the states, the conditions must be related to the funding's purpose, the U.S. Supreme Court has said. HERE

Thought so, so Trump had better get imaginative.

Sure is a good thing they don't do this, looking for Jews...or as in the past, Catholics. And they didn't have to have allegedly committed a crime...ask the Japanese that survived worse, internment.

What happened to small limited govt. formed only to protect our inalienable rights ?

< Message edited by MrRodgers -- 11/18/2016 8:13:34 AM >

_____________________________

You can be a murderous tyrant and the world will remember you fondly but fuck one horse and you will be a horse fucker for all eternity. Catherine the Great

Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite.
J K Galbraith
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Trump to hit cities funding for sanctuary - 11/18/2016 8:25:28 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline 		Roy Beck is not a member of the Trump transition team, is he? He is privy only to the "truth" that I receive from my TV news sources. Wonder where Trump is going to find the one or two million criminal illegals to be deported. Will he hang out a "Come to Jesus" sign. This deportation promise is just one of several promises made to the middle class that Trump will not keep. They will find that a rich dude doesn't really care about the working man and that they were used politically.

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to MrRodgers)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Trump to hit cities funding for sanctuary - 11/18/2016 9:27:00 AM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline 		Actually I think he can. Whether or not he can do it thru direct cuts to funding, I am not sure. But I don't believe that the Administration has to approve grants for whatever purpose the sanctuary city wants one (wastewater/water treatment, roads, playgrounds, business, etc.)

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Trump to hit cities funding for sanctuary - 11/18/2016 9:37:39 AM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline 		What President has in the last fifty years or more ? Giving China MFN status, opening up to unfair trade. Free trade is NOT fair trade.

And this can't force cities and states to enforce federal law ? That is a fine line there because there has been alot of bitching about unfunded mandates. One in NYC made them change all their street signs to conform to an approved font, at their own expense up in the millions of course because they have alot of streets.

In most cases, state law mimics federal law, and local law mimics state law. That allows them to prosecute first and with double jeopardy it is hands off for the feds. Notable exceptions are the pot laws in states where it is now legal. But if you look at the milk raids for example, usually it is the feds. There are some state laws about raw milk but those vary state to state. Only a few states will bring in a SWAT team as if you got a meth lab.

Jurisdiction is not determined by lines on a map. For example when the feds came down on Waco, the Davidians actually called the sheriff saying there were a bunch of crazies with guns surrounding their building. And I want to know just exactly what law they broke. Bitch Reno talked about a meth lab, well did they ever catch any of them with meth ? And Randy Weaver, how come the feds took on a case for a stupid sawed off shotgun ? That was certainly against state law and probably local law, if any. But the feds got word of it first through a vindictive neighbor with whom Randy had a minor land dispute. SDo this punk calls the feds, probably because the locals told him to go fuck off. It would have been better if the locals would have charged him and fined him and that would be that. Instead,m because of a pussy who uses force of government to get what he wants, Mrs. Weaver is dead. And that happened on Bill Clinton's watch and he was the boss so therefore he is responsible.

But the Clintons are experts at getting out of the shit. All those girls in Arkansas intimidated, they had no idea they could go to the feds. If they had, he would never have been President.

Anyway, to get back to the topic, even though Clinton was not that bad of a President he wasn't that good, and he had way too much history to get elected. But the republicans reran Bush.

Trump seems not to be too well read on who is funding what and a few other things. When he gets sworn in he better say something like "OK, I told you what I want to do, now, after actually being there I am going to find out what I can and can't do. Obama wanted to close Gitmo, guess what, it is still there. What changed ? "

Getting on with something like that he can keep his approval rating up and maybe get a second term. He does have alot to learn though. Just like Obama did. And unfortunately he might be as stubborn as JFK and meet the same fate.

T^T

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Trump to hit cities funding for sanctuary - 11/18/2016 9:45:30 AM   
Nnanji


Posts: 4552
Joined: 3/29/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

Actually I think he can. Whether or not he can do it thru direct cuts to funding, I am not sure. But I don't believe that the Administration has to approve grants for whatever purpose the sanctuary city wants one (wastewater/water treatment, roads, playgrounds, business, etc.)

Most grants to things like wastewater projects are given out by the State. The Feds give money to the states and the states then determine the higher need. The Feds could assign the money to the states with the string that no money may go to a sanctuary city. Most sanctuary cities have actually had a vote by council to be a sanctuary. It would be a matter of record. Should a Police Cheif take it upon himself to act like a sanctuary city with no vote of the council, I don't think the Feds could do anything about stuff like wastewater grants. Of course most police departments fund a percentage of officers through federal grants. If the Feds set up a system whereby those grants are only offered to cities and police departments meeting certain standards, it would be easy enough to check as the actual police grant application would have to demonstrate meeting the standard.

All of that is pretty common and easy to do. For instance, half the wastewater grants in CA have to go to economically disadvantaged cities. Each city applying for that grant demonstrates in the grant application why they are the most disadvantaged and therefore the most worthy of the grant. A Queen for the Day situation for those of you who remember. The Feds can very easily add a string that the city demonstrate compliance with any string they want to attach.

It's actually one of the things conservatives rail against. The states send money to the Feds, the Feds take a cut off the top and send money back to the states with strings attached. The strings are regulations written by people that are not elected and do not represent the people who must comply with the strings.

(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Trump to hit cities funding for sanctuary - 11/18/2016 9:51:36 AM   
tamaka


Posts: 5079
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Roy Beck is not a member of the Trump transition team, is he? He is privy only to the "truth" that I receive from my TV news sources. Wonder where Trump is going to find the one or two million criminal illegals to be deported. Will he hang out a "Come to Jesus" sign. This deportation promise is just one of several promises made to the middle class that Trump will not keep. They will find that a rich dude doesn't really care about the working man and that they were used politically.


He can start by deporting all of the drunk drivers.

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Trump to hit cities funding for sanctuary - 11/18/2016 10:01:57 AM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline 		Drunk drivers are fine. Drunk WRECKERS are not.

T^T

(in reply to tamaka)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Trump to hit cities funding for sanctuary - 11/18/2016 10:11:05 AM   
Nnanji


Posts: 4552
Joined: 3/29/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Roy Beck is not a member of the Trump transition team, is he? He is privy only to the "truth" that I receive from my TV news sources. Wonder where Trump is going to find the one or two million criminal illegals to be deported. Will he hang out a "Come to Jesus" sign. This deportation promise is just one of several promises made to the middle class that Trump will not keep. They will find that a rich dude doesn't really care about the working man and that they were used politically.

Well, there are 300,000 in California prisons alone. That's a good start.

Edited to note that 300,000 in California is not correct.

< Message edited by Nnanji -- 11/18/2016 10:22:33 AM >

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Trump to hit cities funding for sanctuary - 11/18/2016 12:18:03 PM   
MercTech


Posts: 3706
Joined: 7/4/2006
Status: offline 		Holding funds to blackmail a local government has a precedent going back to Joan Claybrook when she was head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration under Jimmy Carter.

Federal road funds were withheld from states unless they legislated Joan Claybrook's pet projects of a 55 mph speed limit, criminalizing not wearing a seat belt, raising the legal age from 18 to 21, and to vote in favor of mandatory air bags in cars. At least someone got her to back off of requiring seat belts and air bags on "murdercycles" as she put it.

Yes, a president could instruct all sorts of federal funds to be withheld from a local jurisdiction until they followed federal laws on immigration. We will have to see if the upcoming administration chooses to play that game and whether the "sanctuary cities" toe the line or do as Louisiana did with Claybrook and tell the administration to pack sand.

For just a moment; consider the shit storm if instead of WIC, TANF, and insurance subsidies the normal receivers of such got a letter in the mail saying something like "Your local government as chosen not to participate in federal programs so all benefits are being held in escrow until the situation can be resolved." The phrase, "First we hang all the lawyers." pops to mind.

(in reply to Nnanji)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Trump to hit cities funding for sanctuary - 11/18/2016 2:16:40 PM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Roy Beck is not a member of the Trump transition team, is he? He is privy only to the "truth" that I receive from my TV news sources. Wonder where Trump is going to find the one or two million criminal illegals to be deported. Will he hang out a "Come to Jesus" sign. This deportation promise is just one of several promises made to the middle class that Trump will not keep. They will find that a rich dude doesn't really care about the working man and that they were used politically.

I take it that he was just surmising what tools Trump had, thats' all.

_____________________________

You can be a murderous tyrant and the world will remember you fondly but fuck one horse and you will be a horse fucker for all eternity. Catherine the Great

Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite.
J K Galbraith

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Trump to hit cities funding for sanctuary - 11/18/2016 2:22:39 PM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech

Holding funds to blackmail a local government has a precedent going back to Joan Claybrook when she was head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration under Jimmy Carter.

Federal road funds were withheld from states unless they legislated Joan Claybrook's pet projects of a 55 mph speed limit, criminalizing not wearing a seat belt, raising the legal age from 18 to 21, and to vote in favor of mandatory air bags in cars. At least someone got her to back off of requiring seat belts and air bags on "murdercycles" as she put it.

Yes, a president could instruct all sorts of federal funds to be withheld from a local jurisdiction until they followed federal laws on immigration. We will have to see if the upcoming administration chooses to play that game and whether the "sanctuary cities" toe the line or do as Louisiana did with Claybrook and tell the administration to pack sand.

For just a moment; consider the shit storm if instead of WIC, TANF, and insurance subsidies the normal receivers of such got a letter in the mail saying something like "Your local government as chosen not to participate in federal programs so all benefits are being held in escrow until the situation can be resolved." The phrase, "First we hang all the lawyers." pops to mind.

Actually no. Claybrooks issues were accomplished through a threatened denial of federal highway funds.

For example, the government threatened to withhold highway funds from any state that failed to adopt a 0.08 blood-alcohol limit: Both the limit and the highway funding were related to road safety.

"If the funding is for improving childhood education, it's hard to say that's reasonably related to local law-enforcement cooperation with deportations," said Mary Fan, a University of Washington law school professor.

However, the U.S. Justice Department's inspector general looked at some jurisdictions with sanctuary policies earlier this year and concluded some appear to violate a federal law that says state and local governments may not prohibit or restrict workers from sharing information about a person's immigration status with federal immigration officials.

Having such policies could jeopardize millions of dollars in DOJ grant money the jurisdictions receive, the inspector general's memo said.

Same link

_____________________________

You can be a murderous tyrant and the world will remember you fondly but fuck one horse and you will be a horse fucker for all eternity. Catherine the Great

Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite.
J K Galbraith

(in reply to MercTech)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Trump to hit cities funding for sanctuary - 11/18/2016 2:32:16 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech

Holding funds to blackmail a local government has a precedent going back to Joan Claybrook when she was head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration under Jimmy Carter.

Federal road funds were withheld from states unless they legislated Joan Claybrook's pet projects of a 55 mph speed limit, criminalizing not wearing a seat belt, raising the legal age from 18 to 21, and to vote in favor of mandatory air bags in cars. At least someone got her to back off of requiring seat belts and air bags on "murdercycles" as she put it.

Yes, a president could instruct all sorts of federal funds to be withheld from a local jurisdiction until they followed federal laws on immigration. We will have to see if the upcoming administration chooses to play that game and whether the "sanctuary cities" toe the line or do as Louisiana did with Claybrook and tell the administration to pack sand.

For just a moment; consider the shit storm if instead of WIC, TANF, and insurance subsidies the normal receivers of such got a letter in the mail saying something like "Your local government as chosen not to participate in federal programs so all benefits are being held in escrow until the situation can be resolved." The phrase, "First we hang all the lawyers." pops to mind.


She needs to be tortured to death. Slowly. YOU DO NOT TELL ME TO WEAR A SEAT BELT. What's more, I want her in a car driving cross country with no AC through Texas, New Mexico and a few other lovely places. AAnd the windows won't roll down.

The fuck she think she is to tell us how fast to drive ? All from some ivory tower up in DC or NYC, where these motherfuckers like to hide.

Nevada told them to go fuck off with their 55 MPH bullshit. Up to about 85
MPH there you got a ticket for "wasting energy" which was ten bucks and no points on your license. What's more once they knew you they would not bother you again. Nevada is uncool about pot, but they are alright on alot of other things. Kinda like Arizona.

T^T

(in reply to MercTech)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Trump to hit cities funding for sanctuary - 11/18/2016 2:44:11 PM   
MercTech


Posts: 3706
Joined: 7/4/2006
Status: offline 		I should have been more precise. When mentioning federal funds and NHTSA I did mean the federal highway funds that Joan Claybrook has supervisory control over. I had forgotten the BAC controversy and including lowering the BAC limit to 0.08 from the 0.10 that the PHS considered threshold of debilitating. Then the bandwagon of "we are going to be safer than required" lowering of BAC limits to 0.04 in many states.

Hmmm, would those violations in sanctuary laws be part of whistle-blower protections where an employer or government official is forbidden to take action against a person reporting violations of regulations to inspectors? That would be a wonderful civil rights fight with sanctuary laws vs labor laws.

(in reply to MrRodgers)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Trump to hit cities funding for sanctuary - 11/18/2016 4:45:43 PM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or


quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech

Holding funds to blackmail a local government has a precedent going back to Joan Claybrook when she was head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration under Jimmy Carter.

Federal road funds were withheld from states unless they legislated Joan Claybrook's pet projects of a 55 mph speed limit, criminalizing not wearing a seat belt, raising the legal age from 18 to 21, and to vote in favor of mandatory air bags in cars. At least someone got her to back off of requiring seat belts and air bags on "murdercycles" as she put it.

Yes, a president could instruct all sorts of federal funds to be withheld from a local jurisdiction until they followed federal laws on immigration. We will have to see if the upcoming administration chooses to play that game and whether the "sanctuary cities" toe the line or do as Louisiana did with Claybrook and tell the administration to pack sand.

For just a moment; consider the shit storm if instead of WIC, TANF, and insurance subsidies the normal receivers of such got a letter in the mail saying something like "Your local government as chosen not to participate in federal programs so all benefits are being held in escrow until the situation can be resolved." The phrase, "First we hang all the lawyers." pops to mind.


She needs to be tortured to death. Slowly. YOU DO NOT TELL ME TO WEAR A SEAT BELT. What's more, I want her in a car driving cross country with no AC through Texas, New Mexico and a few other lovely places. AAnd the windows won't roll down.

The fuck she think she is to tell us how fast to drive ? All from some ivory tower up in DC or NYC, where these motherfuckers like to hide.

Nevada told them to go fuck off with their 55 MPH bullshit. Up to about 85
MPH there you got a ticket for "wasting energy" which was ten bucks and no points on your license. What's more once they knew you they would not bother you again. Nevada is uncool about pot, but they are alright on alot of other things. Kinda like Arizona.

T^T

You don't favor recreational pot ? It passed do you know ? Recreational pot now as of 11/9...Alaska, California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Nevada, Oregon and Washington.

The real problem with seat belt requirements and the standardization in air bag for all cars, is that even though safer, it was a windfall for auto insurance industry as was the federal speed limit, there being no corresponding reduction in premiums. Within a few years of passage, (speed limit) I know for a fact that as a result of that windfall, State Farm paid $50 million cash for 10 brand new IBM 370's.

< Message edited by MrRodgers -- 11/18/2016 5:03:11 PM >

_____________________________

You can be a murderous tyrant and the world will remember you fondly but fuck one horse and you will be a horse fucker for all eternity. Catherine the Great

Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite.
J K Galbraith

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Trump to hit cities funding for sanctuary - 11/18/2016 4:56:12 PM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech

I should have been more precise. When mentioning federal funds and NHTSA I did mean the federal highway funds that Joan Claybrook has supervisory control over. I had forgotten the BAC controversy and including lowering the BAC limit to 0.08 from the 0.10 that the PHS considered threshold of debilitating. Then the bandwagon of "we are going to be safer than required" lowering of BAC limits to 0.04 in many states.

Hmmm, would those violations in sanctuary laws be part of whistle-blower protections where an employer or government official is forbidden to take action against a person reporting violations of regulations to inspectors? That would be a wonderful civil rights fight with sanctuary laws vs labor laws.

I am not familiar with what you call sanctuary 'laws' as written, because to my knowledge, there exists no codified version. The 'sanctuary' cities involves those jurisdictions that protect against the federal immigration regime.

Also, I am thinking that because whistle blower protections in almost all cases...are a matter of law, there has been a history of their violation and that violation going unheeded. So as for sanctuary itself vs labor laws, I doubt things will change.

_____________________________

You can be a murderous tyrant and the world will remember you fondly but fuck one horse and you will be a horse fucker for all eternity. Catherine the Great

Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite.
J K Galbraith

(in reply to MercTech)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Trump to hit cities funding for sanctuary - 11/18/2016 5:32:40 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

Having such policies could jeopardize millions of dollars in DOJ grant money the jurisdictions receive, the inspector general's memo said.


The IG's memo provides suggestions for action to be taken on NEW applications for funds. As I read the memo (he sent me a copy) it applies to grant requests from the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) the Office of Violence Against Women (OVW) and the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP)

It should be noted that the IG is not referring to Block Grants or grants from other Federal Departments.

I would imagine a Trump government would have to go to Congress for authority to withhold funds more generally. I also imagine that a lot of Congressional types would wish to protect the funds available to their own jurisdictions.

See page #9 of the memo

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to MrRodgers)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Trump to hit cities funding for sanctuary - 11/18/2016 11:41:39 PM   
LadyDemura


Posts: 141
Joined: 2/12/2016
Status: offline 		Why is it Republicans are always talking that power should be with state and local governments until they get power at the Federal level? How does this have anything to do with interstate commerce?

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: Trump to hit cities funding for sanctuary - 11/18/2016 11:58:54 PM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline 		This this particular instance immigration is left to the Congress.


(in reply to LadyDemura)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: Trump to hit cities funding for sanctuary - 11/19/2016 12:11:33 AM   
DaddySatyr


Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyDemura

Why is it Republicans are always talking that power should be with state and local governments until they get power at the Federal level? How does this have anything to do with interstate commerce?

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.





quote:



We the People of the United States, in order to form a perfect union, establish justice , insure domestic tranquility , provide for the common defense , promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this constitution for the United States of America.



"Establish Justice" = write and enforce laws that are for the good of all the states (immigration vis-a-vis the amount of people, eating up our resources).

"domestic tranquility" = as opposed to the bullshit marches, every year staged by illegal aliens that close businesses, snarl traffic, interrupt civil services and demand that we acquiesce to their demands and allow our country to be turned into "North Mexico".

"common defense" = the congress is the only body that can raise an army and declare war. The invasion coming from our south used to only be an economic one. Now, porous borders leave us exposed to Jihadi fuckwits.

The preamble lays out how immigration is the purview of the federal government.



Michael

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to LadyDemura)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: Trump to hit cities funding for sanctuary - 11/19/2016 12:28:17 AM   
LadyDemura


Posts: 141
Joined: 2/12/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

This this particular instance immigration is left to the Congress.




There is no immigration clause in the Constitution. Our state likes Mexican immigrants. They do jobs like picking crops no one else is willing to do. There would be some support in this state if ALL immigration was banned. The H1B Visa program makes it very hard for recent college graduates to find jobs in Silicon Valley...

(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Trump to hit cities funding for sanctuary Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.141