Denver's nut job mayor to head the resistance.

[OneMoreFarang]

On 11/25/2024 at 11:07 PM, Ben Zioner said:

America will then be reborn.

It seems you still have hope for that place. 

[riclag]

On 11/26/2024 at 9:23 AM, Cryingdick said:

https://www.9news.com/article/news/politics/denver-mayor-mike-johnston-police-officers-block-trump-deportation/73-99dcea89-e9ad-4e11-ad1e-d3facd6e5519

 

9NEWS asked the mayor several times what his plan is on day one if federal forces or national guardsmen from other states show up in Colorado. He said right now there is no plan, but city leaders are hoping to come up with one before the inauguration in January.

Close Ad

 

 

Federal judge shopping!

 

Obama & Biden got many stationed all over the states.

The lefts got many activist organizations all ready lined up to protest deportation!

https://www.organizedcommunities.org/

[Ben Zioner]

3 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

It seems you still have hope for that place. 

I do actually, USA has it's ups and down, but better "fundamentals" than any other place on the world. 

 

 

 

 

 

[cardinalblue]

Trump spouted this this gloom and doom BS his first term and he ended up deporting far less than Obama and Biden did...

 

Everyone is for deporting criminals whether crimes in their homeland or in USA...But start there....If you look at the numbers, that is the focus of who is deported concurrently...They could do a better job

 

If you look at crime stats, US citizens for serious violent crimes commit twice that of illegals when data is adjusted and 4X that of illegals for property crimes...Americans need to look in the mirror and asked what is wrong with their culture?

 

I vote to deport all criminals American citizens or not back to their ancestry country...don't use illegals as an excuse for a far greater cultural problem in USA....You don't deport 100% if only 5-10% is the problem...focus on the problem...that is what the Denver mayor is saying... 

[thaibeachlovers]

On 11/26/2024 at 5:27 AM, frank83628 said:

Why do these people want to protect people illegally in the country, is it purely to defy trump and make a name for them selves while doing it.... like Leticia James.

Perhaps he wants his 15 minutes of fame.

[Hawaiian]

1 hour ago, cardinalblue said:

Trump spouted this this gloom and doom BS his first term and he ended up deporting far less than Obama and Biden did...

 

Everyone is for deporting criminals whether crimes in their homeland or in USA...But start there....If you look at the numbers, that is the focus of who is deported concurrently...They could do a better job

 

If you look at crime stats, US citizens for serious violent crimes commit twice that of illegals when data is adjusted and 4X that of illegals for property crimes...Americans need to look in the mirror and asked what is wrong with their culture?

 

I vote to deport all criminals American citizens or not back to their ancestry country...don't use illegals as an excuse for a far greater cultural problem in USA....You don't deport 100% if only 5-10% is the problem...focus on the problem...that is what the Denver mayor is saying... 

It's quite evident you don't understand how deportation works.

[Patong2021]

9 hours ago, Hawaiian said:

Seems as if you do not understand my post.  You keep repeating how the mayor is an outstanding family man, etc.  The fact is these are illegal immigrants, many of them violent criminals.  They entered this country illegally and should not be allowed to stay.  Why have immigration laws if they are not enforced?

How many of unauthorized immigrants in Denver are there?

How many of the unauthorized immigrants are violent criminals?

 

[Cryingdick]

3 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

How many of unauthorized immigrants in Denver are there?

How many of the unauthorized immigrants are violent criminals?

 

 

After all it is only a handful of apartment complexes controlled by violent Venezuelan gangs in the Denver area. 

[Tango777]

On 11/25/2024 at 11:27 AM, frank83628 said:

Why do these people want to protect people illegally in the country, is it purely to defy trump and make a name for them selves while doing it.... like Leticia James.

In most cases they are taking $ in one form or another from the S0ro$ gang and others, and they also do it to get votes from people who want something for nothing. All the way to the top of the left. 

[Hawaiian]

4 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

How many of unauthorized immigrants in Denver are there?

How many of the unauthorized immigrants are violent criminals?

 

How many?  One too many.  If someone commits a only ONE murder there is no incentive to track them down because it is only ONE murder. 

If Denver does nothing about helping to remove illegal immigrants, more will come including criminals, both petty and violent.  Remember, violent criminals often start out as non-violent.

[TedG]

 

Resist we much. 

[TedG]

5 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

 

After all it is only a handful of apartment complexes controlled by violent Venezuelan gangs in the Denver area. 

 

It’s the price you pay for diversity.  

[Patong2021]

8 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

After all it is only a handful of apartment complexes controlled by violent Venezuelan gangs in the Denver area. 

 

The Denver area, is not the city of Denver. There is no evidence to support the claim that  apartment buildings in Denver have been over run by  gangs. 

To date, the allegations relate to apartment buildings in Aurora and  appear to be an excuse put forward by what is described as a slumlord for the neglect of its property(s).  The reality is that the county health agency has now closed one of the buildings down because of building neglect and is moving to take action against others.  The premises were over run with bedbugs, and rodents and basic repairs were not done. The property owner has tried to excuse their neglect by blaming the presence of  a criminal gang.

A simple visit to the local news would have shown many articles on the situation, all of them highlighting the  exploitation of residents and poor upkeep.

 

7 hours ago, Hawaiian said:

How many?  One too many.  If someone commits a only ONE murder there is no incentive to track them down because it is only ONE murder. 

If Denver does nothing about helping to remove illegal immigrants, more will come including criminals, both petty and violent.  Remember, violent criminals often start out as non-violent.

 

The Mayor of Denver has not said that he would block the removal of criminals. His issue is one of fairness and his comments are in respect to the immigrants who have lived in the USA for a long time,and who have been doing the menial low wage jobs, been law abiding, paying taxes  and keeping a low profile. Much of the unauthorized immigrant population has been here for 10 years or more .

 

The mayor is trying to  prevent a human catastrophe that could destroy social service agencies and create unintended child abuse consequences. Have you seen the Pew Research data on the unauthorized immigrant demographics? Of the 11 million+ population;

- In 86% of these households, either the householder or their spouse is an unauthorized immigrant.

- Almost 70% of these households are considered “mixed status,” meaning that they also contain lawful immigrants or U.S.-born residents.

- About 4.4 million U.S.-born children under 18 live with an unauthorized immigrant parent. They account for about 84% of all minor children living with their unauthorized immigrant parent. Altogether, about 850,000 children under 18 are unauthorized immigrants in 2022.

 

How do you propose to care for 4.4 million children if you remove their parent(s) who is currently paying for their care?

By law, the children cannot be removed from the country, and must be cared for by the state, which means the taxpayer.  Depending on the state, it can cost anywhere from $10,000- $20,000 a year per child for basic care. Do the math. Now tell me where you will come up with a minimum $44 billion a year to pay for the obligation to care for US citizens.

 

[Hawaiian]

59 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

 

The Denver area, is not the city of Denver. There is no evidence to support the claim that  apartment buildings in Denver have been over run by  gangs. 

To date, the allegations relate to apartment buildings in Aurora and  appear to be an excuse put forward by what is described as a slumlord for the neglect of its property(s).  The reality is that the county health agency has now closed one of the buildings down because of building neglect and is moving to take action against others.  The premises were over run with bedbugs, and rodents and basic repairs were not done. The property owner has tried to excuse their neglect by blaming the presence of  a criminal gang.

A simple visit to the local news would have shown many articles on the situation, all of them highlighting the  exploitation of residents and poor upkeep.

 

 

The Mayor of Denver has not said that he would block the removal of criminals. His issue is one of fairness and his comments are in respect to the immigrants who have lived in the USA for a long time,and who have been doing the menial low wage jobs, been law abiding, paying taxes  and keeping a low profile. Much of the unauthorized immigrant population has been here for 10 years or more .

 

The mayor is trying to  prevent a human catastrophe that could destroy social service agencies and create unintended child abuse consequences. Have you seen the Pew Research data on the unauthorized immigrant demographics? Of the 11 million+ population;

- In 86% of these households, either the householder or their spouse is an unauthorized immigrant.

- Almost 70% of these households are considered “mixed status,” meaning that they also contain lawful immigrants or U.S.-born residents.

- About 4.4 million U.S.-born children under 18 live with an unauthorized immigrant parent. They account for about 84% of all minor children living with their unauthorized immigrant parent. Altogether, about 850,000 children under 18 are unauthorized immigrants in 2022.

 

How do you propose to care for 4.4 million children if you remove their parent(s) who is currently paying for their care?

By law, the children cannot be removed from the country, and must be cared for by the state, which means the taxpayer.  Depending on the state, it can cost anywhere from $10,000- $20,000 a year per child for basic care. Do the math. Now tell me where you will come up with a minimum $44 billion a year to pay for the obligation to care for US citizens.

 

If a wanted criminal is discovered after ten years of hiding from the law, in all fairness, they should not be arrested????  That's for the court's to decide and not by you or the mayor of Denver.

[Patong2021]

24 minutes ago, Hawaiian said:

If a wanted criminal is discovered after ten years of hiding from the law, in all fairness, they should not be arrested????  That's for the court's to decide and not by you or the mayor of Denver.

 

No one is  arguing  against the removal of a "wanted criminal, discovered after 10 years of hiding from the law".  

BTW, how do you propose caring for the millions of  US children who will be left without financial support once their paying parent is removed? What's your plan?

 

[Hawaiian]

12 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

 

No one is  arguing  against the removal of a "wanted criminal, discovered after 10 years of hiding from the law".  

BTW, how do you propose caring for the millions of  US children who will be left without financial support once their paying parent is removed? What's your plan?

 

According to Tom Homan, Trump's new "immigration czar", accommodations will be available for deported parents to take their children with them.  If the parents don't want to take their children with them then legal relatives will be given an opportunity to take them in.  There are many NGOs that will sponsor an adoption program for any "unwanted" kids.  Some deported parents might asked to have their kids sent to them once they are resettled in their home country.   

Judging by your posts, you mostly likely think it will never work.  I say, if there is a will there is a way to make it work.

This is the why the U.S. Constitution needs to be amended to deny citizenship to children born in the U.S. to illegals.

[Hawaiian]

30 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

 

No one is  arguing  against the removal of a "wanted criminal, discovered after 10 years of hiding from the law".  

BTW, how do you propose caring for the millions of  US children who will be left without financial support once their paying parent is removed? What's your plan?

 

I made the analogy of a wanted criminal with your justification for not deporting long-term illegals.  They broke the law and by definition are criminals  Contrary to what you may think this is what our laws say.

[jvs]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_federal_politicians_convicted_of_crimes

[Patong2021]

 

12 hours ago, Hawaiian said:

According to Tom Homan, Trump's new "immigration czar", accommodations will be available for deported parents to take their children with them.  If the parents don't want to take their children with them then legal relatives will be given an opportunity to take them in.  There are many NGOs that will sponsor an adoption program for any "unwanted" kids.  Some deported parents might asked to have their kids sent to them once they are resettled in their home country.   

Judging by your posts, you mostly likely think it will never work.  I say, if there is a will there is a way to make it work.

This is the why the U.S. Constitution needs to be amended to deny citizenship to children born in the U.S. to illegals.

 

There are an estimated 4 million+ US citizens who are minors and who are the children of unauthorized migrants. The US and the state where the minors are domiciled have a legal (and moral) duty of care for the minors. Encouraging their removal to countries/regions where the children would be at risk will open multiple civil liabilities against the US government. It may even be grounds to stop their departure.

 

Your position that  If the parents don't want to take their children with them then legal relatives will be given an opportunity to take them in is not sustainable. Those relatives themselves may be unauthorized, or they may be financially unable to care for the children. All prospective foster or assigned care givers would need to be screened and supervised as is the situation now. They most likely would require financial support. Have you costed out this option?

 

You claim that there are many NGOs that will sponsor an adoption program for any "unwanted" kids. 

You are very wrong. Children currently languish in care homes. There are approximately 400,000 children in state sponsored care, primarily through foster homes.  Of this, 115,000 children are waiting for adoptions. How do you expect a system which cannot not care for the children currently in care, to care for millions of additional children? There are not enough foster homes, or care beds available.

 

Amending the US Constitution will not occur.  Even if it did, there would still be millions of US citizens in need of care.

 

[Patong2021]

12 hours ago, Hawaiian said:

I made the analogy of a wanted criminal with your justification for not deporting long-term illegals.  They broke the law and by definition are criminals  Contrary to what you may think this is what our laws say.

 

I suggest you take the time to understand the criminal code of the USA.  Until one is convicted of a crime, one is not a criminal. 

The mayor of Denver has not objected to the removal of criminals, and supports the removal of violent offenders.

What is your plan to deal with the 4 million+  US citizens who are at risk. Since you wish to rely on the law, please note that multiple US laws set out the following statutory rights of children in the USA;

 

-Right to Legal Representation: A child has the right to be represented by an attorney in court. This attorney, often called a “guardian ad litem” or “child advocate,” acts as the child’s voice and ensures their best interests are taken into consideration during the legal process.

-Right to Due Process: This means they have the right to a fair and impartial hearing, the right to present evidence and witnesses on their behalf, and the right to confront witnesses against them.

-Right to Participation: Children may have the right to participate in certain legal decisions that directly affect them, such as child custody arrangements.

-Right to Protection: Courts are responsible for ensuring the safety and well-being of children. This includes taking measures to protect them from harm or exposure to traumatic experiences during the legal process.

-Right to Education: The legal system recognizes a child’s right to education, and court decisions should aim to ensure that educational opportunities are not disrupted unnecessarily.

-Right to Timely Proceedings: Children have the right to have their legal matters handled in a timely manner, so as not to unduly prolong legal uncertainties or disruptions in their lives.

-Right to Voice Concerns: Children have the right to voice their concerns and express their feelings about the legal process, especially when it directly impacts their lives.

 

Aside from the cost of care for the millions of children who would be affected by the removal of their caregiver(s), the federal government would be obliged to provide legal counsel to the children to respect their statutory legal rights. 

 

Where are you going to find the  billions of dollars to pay for this. More importantly, where are you going to find the tens of thousands of people needed to undertake this activity?

[Cryingdick]

1 minute ago, Patong2021 said:

 

I suggest you take the time to understand the criminal code of the USA.  Until one is convicted of a crime, one is not a criminal. 

The mayor of Denver has not objected to the removal of criminals, and supports the removal of violent offenders.

What is your plan to deal with the 4 million+  US citizens who are at risk. Since you wish to rely on the law, please note that multiple US laws set out the following statutory rights of children in the USA;

 

-Right to Legal Representation: A child has the right to be represented by an attorney in court. This attorney, often called a “guardian ad litem” or “child advocate,” acts as the child’s voice and ensures their best interests are taken into consideration during the legal process.

-Right to Due Process: This means they have the right to a fair and impartial hearing, the right to present evidence and witnesses on their behalf, and the right to confront witnesses against them.

-Right to Participation: Children may have the right to participate in certain legal decisions that directly affect them, such as child custody arrangements.

-Right to Protection: Courts are responsible for ensuring the safety and well-being of children. This includes taking measures to protect them from harm or exposure to traumatic experiences during the legal process.

-Right to Education: The legal system recognizes a child’s right to education, and court decisions should aim to ensure that educational opportunities are not disrupted unnecessarily.

-Right to Timely Proceedings: Children have the right to have their legal matters handled in a timely manner, so as not to unduly prolong legal uncertainties or disruptions in their lives.

-Right to Voice Concerns: Children have the right to voice their concerns and express their feelings about the legal process, especially when it directly impacts their lives.

 

Aside from the cost of care for the millions of children who would be affected by the removal of their caregiver(s), the federal government would be obliged to provide legal counsel to the children to respect their statutory legal rights. 

 

Where are you going to find the  billions of dollars to pay for this. More importantly, where are you going to find the tens of thousands of people needed to undertake this activity?

Prior to being convicted you are normally arrested.  See how that works? 

[Hawaiian]

13 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

 

I suggest you take the time to understand the criminal code of the USA.  Until one is convicted of a crime, one is not a criminal. 

The mayor of Denver has not objected to the removal of criminals, and supports the removal of violent offenders.

What is your plan to deal with the 4 million+  US citizens who are at risk. Since you wish to rely on the law, please note that multiple US laws set out the following statutory rights of children in the USA;

 

-Right to Legal Representation: A child has the right to be represented by an attorney in court. This attorney, often called a “guardian ad litem” or “child advocate,” acts as the child’s voice and ensures their best interests are taken into consideration during the legal process.

-Right to Due Process: This means they have the right to a fair and impartial hearing, the right to present evidence and witnesses on their behalf, and the right to confront witnesses against them.

-Right to Participation: Children may have the right to participate in certain legal decisions that directly affect them, such as child custody arrangements.

-Right to Protection: Courts are responsible for ensuring the safety and well-being of children. This includes taking measures to protect them from harm or exposure to traumatic experiences during the legal process.

-Right to Education: The legal system recognizes a child’s right to education, and court decisions should aim to ensure that educational opportunities are not disrupted unnecessarily.

-Right to Timely Proceedings: Children have the right to have their legal matters handled in a timely manner, so as not to unduly prolong legal uncertainties or disruptions in their lives.

-Right to Voice Concerns: Children have the right to voice their concerns and express their feelings about the legal process, especially when it directly impacts their lives.

 

Aside from the cost of care for the millions of children who would be affected by the removal of their caregiver(s), the federal government would be obliged to provide legal counsel to the children to respect their statutory legal rights. 

 

Where are you going to find the  billions of dollars to pay for this. More importantly, where are you going to find the tens of thousands of people needed to undertake this activity?

Make all the arguments you want in defense of these illegals.  It is going to happen.  Democratic Texas Representative, Henry Cuellar, is working with the future border czar, Tom Homan, to implement the deportation agreement.  He is in favor of deportation and is encouraging fellow Democrats to get on board. 

As I said before, if there is a will, there is a way and you and your kind are not going to stop it.

[Hawaiian]

22 minutes ago, Cryingdick said:

Prior to being convicted you are normally arrested.  See how that works? 

Right.  Arrest is the first stage in criminal proceedings. 

[Cryingdick]

1 minute ago, Hawaiian said:

Right.  Arrest is the first stage in criminal proceedings. 

 

The poster that was talking about not being a criminal doesn't understand American law. The police do not operate with the presumption of innocence for suspects. You are a potential criminal and treated as one when you arrested and booked into jail. 

[jimmybcool]

On 11/25/2024 at 10:05 PM, Patong2021 said:

Political rhetoric and some crafty MAGAites realizing that people like Mike Johnston are a threat to the MAGA manifesto.

The mayor is popular. He is young, white and happily married with 3 kids. Not even the slightest hint of scandal attaches to him. A graduate of Yale and Harvard, he is also a lawyer with deep community roots in a community distinguished by a large latino population.  In order to calm their fears, he offers his words of defiance. Denver cannot afford a mass panic, because the businesses that rely on these workers would have to shut their doors. Who then would clean the floors at the hospitals, or change the diapers in the  nursing homes? The slaughterhouses would shut down.

The reality is that the local police cannot  enforce immigration laws. Nor can they stand guard on county borders unless it is to enforce a local law. The state can always take control of the police department if there is an issue. The mayor is representing the people of his city and his powers are limited to civic issues.

 

That is a far cry from actively resisting proper policing by ICE and the Federal government with regard to immigration issues.  Yes he has no authority to deport illegals.  He also has no authority to prevent the federal government and ICE doing so.  The separation of powers is clear and the Feds are 100% responsible for immigration issues. 

 

If he interferes with the Feds that would be illegal and only an act of defiance to be more woke. 

[Cryingdick]

2 hours ago, jimmybcool said:

 

That is a far cry from actively resisting proper policing by ICE and the Federal government with regard to immigration issues.  Yes he has no authority to deport illegals.  He also has no authority to prevent the federal government and ICE doing so.  The separation of powers is clear and the Feds are 100% responsible for immigration issues. 

 

If he interferes with the Feds that would be illegal and only an act of defiance to be more woke. 

This is because the poster you are responding to uses large walls of text, but can't use three words about actual American law. 

[Patong2021]

6 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

Prior to being convicted you are normally arrested.  See how that works? 

 

Yes, that is usually what occurs. However, an arrest does not necessarily result in detention. On the contrary, almost all non violent accused are released either on a promise to appear, or on bond,or subject to other conditions. Unauthorized  migrants are entitled to a hearing. New migrants are processed in under 24 hours and unless authorized to stay in the USA are now immediately removed. A migrant authorize to remain until another hearing is in effect "legal".

 

 

6 hours ago, Hawaiian said:

Make all the arguments you want in defense of these illegals.  It is going to happen.  Democratic Texas Representative, Henry Cuellar, is working with the future border czar, Tom Homan, to implement the deportation agreement.  He is in favor of deportation and is encouraging fellow Democrats to get on board. 

As I said before, if there is a will, there is a way and you and your kind are not going to stop it.

 

I am not defending unauthorized migrants. I am however asking how you will care for the 4 million+ US children who will not have their caregivers available to care and pay for their upkeep. How do you propose to manage that? Did you even give it any thought?

 

6 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

 

The poster that was talking about not being a criminal doesn't understand American law. The police do not operate with the presumption of innocence for suspects. You are a potential criminal and treated as one when you arrested and booked into jail. 

 

I have a  better understanding of US law than you do. You obviously do not understand the Fifth Amendment and the concept of due process.  Due process means that the government and its associated agents cannot deprive people of their freedom or property unless they follow the proper procedures. The right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty is fundamental to due process. The presumption of innocence is a constitutional right, is extended through this amendment. This position  dates back to 

COFFIN v. U.S. , 162 U.S. 664 (1896),  United States Supreme Court May 04, 1896. It has been upheld and expanded in multiple rulings since then.

 

Your argument is one of  absolute power for the police, and would allow a police officer to decide a person's guilt. Fortunately, this is not allowed and the USA is not a totalitarian state (yet). A principal function of police is the safeguarding of democratic processes through the upholding of the law. 

 

Nor do the municipal or state police have a mandate to enforce  immigration laws. DHS agents and other federal agents do. In the USA there is a separation between federal and state powers & jurisdictions. 

 

Keep it up and the citizen militias, the posse comitatus groups, the sovereign citizen followers, Libertarians and independent conservatives will turn on you for advocating  an absolute police mandate  rule.

[Hawaiian]

1 hour ago, Patong2021 said:

 

Yes, that is usually what occurs. However, an arrest does not necessarily result in detention. On the contrary, almost all non violent accused are released either on a promise to appear, or on bond,or subject to other conditions. Unauthorized  migrants are entitled to a hearing. New migrants are processed in under 24 hours and unless authorized to stay in the USA are now immediately removed. A migrant authorize to remain until another hearing is in effect "legal".

 

 

 

I am not defending unauthorized migrants. I am however asking how you will care for the 4 million+ US children who will not have their caregivers available to care and pay for their upkeep. How do you propose to manage that? Did you even give it any thought?

 

 

I have a  better understanding of US law than you do. You obviously do not understand the Fifth Amendment and the concept of due process.  Due process means that the government and its associated agents cannot deprive people of their freedom or property unless they follow the proper procedures. The right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty is fundamental to due process. The presumption of innocence is a constitutional right, is extended through this amendment. This position  dates back to 

COFFIN v. U.S. , 162 U.S. 664 (1896),  United States Supreme Court May 04, 1896. It has been upheld and expanded in multiple rulings since then.

 

Your argument is one of  absolute power for the police, and would allow a police officer to decide a person's guilt. Fortunately, this is not allowed and the USA is not a totalitarian state (yet). A principal function of police is the safeguarding of democratic processes through the upholding of the law. 

 

Nor do the municipal or state police have a mandate to enforce  immigration laws. DHS agents and other federal agents do. In the USA there is a separation between federal and state powers & jurisdictions. 

 

Keep it up and the citizen militias, the posse comitatus groups, the sovereign citizen followers, Libertarians and independent conservatives will turn on you for advocating  an absolute police mandate  rule.

It is not my job to address the problem of taking care of  the 4 million + (your figures) children you keep mentioning about.  This is why Trump has appointed Tom Homan as border czar.  As former temporary acting head of ICE he is well aware of the complexities of the job.  Since you are so worried I suggest you contact him with your concerns.

[Hawaiian]

1 hour ago, Patong2021 said:

 

Yes, that is usually what occurs. However, an arrest does not necessarily result in detention. On the contrary, almost all non violent accused are released either on a promise to appear, or on bond,or subject to other conditions. Unauthorized  migrants are entitled to a hearing. New migrants are processed in under 24 hours and unless authorized to stay in the USA are now immediately removed. A migrant authorize to remain until another hearing is in effect "legal".

 

 

 

I am not defending unauthorized migrants. I am however asking how you will care for the 4 million+ US children who will not have their caregivers available to care and pay for their upkeep. How do you propose to manage that? Did you even give it any thought?

 

 

I have a  better understanding of US law than you do. You obviously do not understand the Fifth Amendment and the concept of due process.  Due process means that the government and its associated agents cannot deprive people of their freedom or property unless they follow the proper procedures. The right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty is fundamental to due process. The presumption of innocence is a constitutional right, is extended through this amendment. This position  dates back to 

COFFIN v. U.S. , 162 U.S. 664 (1896),  United States Supreme Court May 04, 1896. It has been upheld and expanded in multiple rulings since then.

 

Your argument is one of  absolute power for the police, and would allow a police officer to decide a person's guilt. Fortunately, this is not allowed and the USA is not a totalitarian state (yet). A principal function of police is the safeguarding of democratic processes through the upholding of the law. 

 

Nor do the municipal or state police have a mandate to enforce  immigration laws. DHS agents and other federal agents do. In the USA there is a separation between federal and state powers & jurisdictions. 

 

Keep it up and the citizen militias, the posse comitatus groups, the sovereign citizen followers, Libertarians and independent conservatives will turn on you for advocating  an absolute police mandate  rule.

You act like you are an expert of U.S. criminal law.  Is that why you posted word for word from the same online source I read?

[pedro01]

Arrest him

 

Women are dying and being assaulted at the hands of illegals. 

 

Voters voted to end it. 

 

The will of the voters will be carried out.