Trump Administration to Send Thousands of ICE Agents to Target Sanctuary Cities

[Swordsmyth]

The Trump administration is planning on targeting so-called “sanctuary cities” for additional scrutiny by allocating more agents and resources to those cities.
Thomas Homan, the acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, told the Washington Examiner Tuesday that border crossings have plummeted while arrests and demands for removal of undocumented criminals from localities have increased 80 percent since Trump entered office. Homan also criticized sanctuary cities, which he called “ludicrous.”
“In the America I grew up in, cities didn't shield people who violated the law," he told the Examiner. “The president recognizes that you've got to have a true interior enforcement strategy to make it uncomfortable for them.”

More at: https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-adm...192159939.html

[PierzStyx]

Know why this won't work? because immigrants are mobile. They'll just go somewhere else. So, what Trump is really doing is wasting tax money to fund a program doomed to failure form the start, an immigrant bridge to nowhere if you will. Looks good for the idiot cameras though.

[Swordsmyth]

Know why this won't work? because immigrants are mobile. They'll just go somewhere else. So, what Trump is really doing is wasting tax money to fund a program doomed to failure form the start, an immigrant bridge to nowhere if you will. Looks good for the idiot cameras though.

By that logic you can't catch any criminal, if the illegals leave the sanctuary cities they will be in jurisdictions that cooperate with ICE.
More enforcement will lead to decreased illegal activity.

[PierzStyx]

By that logic you can't catch any criminal, if the illegals leave the sanctuary cities they will be in jurisdictions that cooperate with ICE.
More enforcement will lead to decreased illegal activity.

Laws don't decrease criminal activity. Man-made laws increase criminal activity by making more things illegal, often as a means to merely justify more theft by the government. Why do you think pot has been illegal for so long? All laws do is drive the activity further underground, making it more dangerous and violent. It doesn't decrease the activity at all. Again, notice how many people still smoke weed. Or how popular booze remained during Prohibition. But laws do serve a great function for justifying sucking more and more money from the government teat.

The same will occur with immigration. Illegal immigrants will merely continue to go to places where they'll be able to find work and continue to avoid ICE agents. In fact instead of having concentrated places where illegal immigrant are all this will do is cause them to spread across the country where they will continue to be hired under the table by people who don't care about their illegal status.

The irony here for all the Alt. Lefties is in the long run this works completely against their stated goals. This will only serve to spread "immigrant culture" instead of concentrating it in a few places and, secondly, all this does is create another meaningless state welfare program where the government can justify stealing even more money from the public in order to expand its power and reach way beyond its constitutional restrictions and the limitations of federalism. Meaningless Big Government Socialism at its finest from the Progressives on the "Right."

[Swordsmyth]

Laws don't decrease criminal activity. Man-made laws increase criminal activity by making more things illegal, often as a means to merely justify more theft by the government. Why do you think pot has been illegal for so long? All laws do is drive the activity further underground, making it more dangerous and violent. It doesn't decrease the activity at all. Again, notice how many people still smoke weed. Or how popular booze remained during Prohibition. But laws do serve a great function for justifying sucking more and more money from the government teat.

The same will occur with immigration. Illegal immigrants will merely continue to go to places where they'll be able to find work and continue to avoid ICE agents. In fact instead of having concentrated places where illegal immigrant are all this will do is cause them to spread across the country where they will continue to be hired under the table by people who don't care about their illegal status.

The irony here for all the Alt. Lefties is in the long run this works completely against their stated goals. This will only serve to spread "immigrant culture" instead of concentrating it in a few places and, secondly, all this does is create another meaningless state welfare program where the government can justify stealing even more money from the public in order to expand its power and reach way beyond its constitutional restrictions and the limitations of federalism. Meaningless Big Government Socialism at its finest from the Progressives on the "Right."

Bunk.
The deep state runs drugs, they ran moonshine and bootleg during prohibition, that is why you don't see a reduction in drug usage, I am against prohibition but laws and enforcement reduce the targeted activity unless the powers that be undermine them for illicit profit.

[dannno]

Bunk.
The deep state runs drugs, they ran moonshine and bootleg during prohibition, that is why you don't see a reduction in drug usage, I am against prohibition but laws and enforcement reduce the targeted activity unless the powers that be undermine them for illicit profit.

That's debatable, it is possible, but the other things that can push it in the other direction is that you drive it underground, which gives it a "cool" factor, it might be more popular than it would be otherwise.

Then you have the fact that it is more profitable to sell, higher profit margin, which brings in the motivation for dealers to promote it in their circles.

I'm pretty sure that cannabis use might even be down among high school students in Colorado and California because when it is illegal, high school students run the drug trade. This is because another issue, if you are under 18 and you get convicted of a drug offense it gets erased when you turn 18. So older drug dealers might recruit kids to push their product on the street because it is less risky for their longterm prospects if they get arrested.

But you are right, enforcement can potentially have an impact and reduce usage of substances, the problem is everything coming in the other direction - the added profitability makes it that much more advantageous to have some widespread corruption, like you said, plus all the other factors I indicated.

I mean, the war on drugs has been going on for like 50 years and drug use has skyrocketed in that time. Could be other factors at play, but it's hard to dismiss.

[Swordsmyth]

That's debatable, it is possible, but the other things that can push it in the other direction is that you drive it underground, which gives it a "cool" factor, it might be more popular than it would be otherwise.

Then you have the fact that it is more profitable to sell, higher profit margin, which brings in the motivation for dealers to promote it in their circles.

I'm pretty sure that cannabis use might even be down among high school students in Colorado and California because when it is illegal, high school students run the drug trade. This is because another issue, if you are under 18 and you get convicted of a drug offense it gets erased when you turn 18. So older drug dealers might recruit kids to push their product on the street because it is less risky for their longterm prospects if they get arrested.

But you are right, enforcement can potentially have an impact and reduce usage of substances, the problem is everything coming in the other direction - the added profitability makes it that much more advantageous to have some widespread corruption, like you said, plus all the other factors I indicated.

I mean, the war on drugs has been going on for like 50 years and drug use has skyrocketed in that time. Could be other factors at play, but it's hard to dismiss.

In any case Illegal Aliens are not drugs, enforcement will decrease their presence, more will leave and less will come.

[PierzStyx]

Bunk.
The deep state runs drugs, they ran moonshine and bootleg during prohibition, that is why you don't see a reduction in drug usage, I am against prohibition but laws and enforcement reduce the targeted activity unless the powers that be undermine them for illicit profit.

It is funny to see someone try and speak negatively of the "deep state" while simultaneously doing exactly what all the bureaucrats and those in positions of power want you to do- obey them, defend them, and continue to justify their very meaningless existence. "The Deep State is bad! So I'm just going to support drastically expanding its powers beyond all constitutional and human rights limitations so it can greatly increase its ability to invade private homes, seize private property, and generally violate the human rights of anyone it sets its sights upon. And such drastically expanded policing powers will never be used against me in any way!" Great argument! *thumbs up*

No, the State didn't secretly control all the moonshiners and illegal alcohol trade during Prohibition just as they do not run drugs for the cartels today. Indeed, drug running and moonshining were and are private responses to the public's demand despite whatever the law said.

The law has little impact over whether overall crime statistics really change. This is because laws, in order to be effective, have to fit in with social norms. People have to already generally hold the opinion that the law is seeking to enforce. If the law enforces an opinion that isn't the social norm, the majority of people disobey it. http://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/n...on-112414.html

FEE does a good job of breaking it down even further: https://fee.org/articles/why-laws-backfire/

This of course brings up the question of why laws at all. After all, if social norms are the driving factor, making a law doesn't change anything. People will do what they'll do and common law, that is the collective social norms of the people, takes care of most issues. It even regulates such complicated things as marriage and inheritance rights. So then what is the real purpose of legislated, man-made, law? When it merely confirms what society already general believes it is unneeded. When it opposes the general opinion of society it is unheeded, and in the long run is often forced to change. (Again, Prohibition of alcohol and drugs as examples.) The answer is staring us in the face: To expand government power. Prohibition worked wonders for the expansion of the police state. The War on Drug has been incredibly for the expanse of just about every federal government and agency while increasing the government's ability to tax. Legislated law neither keeps us safe nor expands our liberties, indeed it is almost always the goal of legislated law to do those things. It centralizes the power of the state and expands its influence into all the different parts of human life. The law is just about robbing you of your freedom and your money.

In any case, just blaming everything you dislike on the government while craving the power of the State be turned to enforce the way you think things should be on others is the hallmark of Progressive politics. Trump's efforts will ultimately fail to limit illegal immigration. All they will do is deny everyone in the country of their essential liberties by further expanding the policing power of the central police state, meaning the Deep State, cost us billions of dollars, and further the breakdown of the Constitution and federalism. And even if they did succeed this country would be lesser for it, turning the country into Prison State, USA.

[Swordsmyth]

It is funny to see someone try and speak negatively of the "deep state" while simultaneously doing exactly what all the bureaucrats and those in positions of power want you to do- obey them, defend them, and continue to justify their very meaningless existence. "The Deep State is bad! So I'm just going to support drastically expanding its powers beyond all constitutional and human rights limitations so it can greatly increase its ability to invade private homes, seize private property, and generally violate the human rights of anyone it sets its sights upon. And such drastically expanded policing powers will never be used against me in any way!" Great argument! *thumbs up*

No, the State didn't secretly control all the moonshiners and illegal alcohol trade during Prohibition just as they do not run drugs for the cartels today. Indeed, drug running and moonshining were and are private responses to the public's demand despite whatever the law said.

The law has little impact over whether overall crime statistics really change. This is because laws, in order to be effective, have to fit in with social norms. People have to already generally hold the opinion that the law is seeking to enforce. If the law enforces an opinion that isn't the social norm, the majority of people disobey it. http://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/n...on-112414.html

This of course brings up the question of why laws at all. After all, if social norms are the driving factor, making a law doesn't change anything. People will do what they'll do and common law, that is the collective social norms of the people, takes care of most issues. It even regulates such complicated things as marriage and inheritance rights. So then what is the real purpose of legislated, man-made, law? When it merely confirms what society already general believes it is unneeded. When it opposes the general opinion of society it is unheeded, and in the long run is often forced to change. (Again, Prohibition of alcohol and drugs as examples.) The answer is staring us in the face: To expand government power. Prohibition worked wonders for the expansion of the police state. The War on Drug has been incredibly for the expanse of just about every federal government and agency while increasing the government's ability to tax. Legislated law neither keeps us safe nor expand sour liberties, indeed it is almost always the opposite of legislated law to do those things. It centralizes the power of the state and expands its influence into all the different parts of human life. The law is just about robbing you of your freedom and your money.

In any case, just blaming everything you dislike on the government while craving the power of the State be turned to enforce the way you think things should be on others is the hallmark of Progressive politics. Trump's efforts will ultimately fail to limit illegal immigration. All they will do is deny everyone in the country of their essential liberties by further expanding the policing power of the central police state, meaning the Deep State, cost us billions of dollars, and further the breakdown of the Constitution and federalism. And even if they did succeed this country would be lesser for it, turning the country into Prison State, USA.

I oppose prohibition but Immigration is not drugs or alcohol, your attempt to confuse the two and to ignore the fact that the deep state makes things illegal so they can profit by dominating the black market do nothing to help your position on Illegal Aliens, and your anarchist ramblings reveal your disconnect from reality.
Immigration enforcement has a history of reducing Illegal Aliens.

[dannno]

In any case Illegal Aliens are not drugs, enforcement will decrease their presence, more will leave and less will come.

Ya pretty sure you're right, I don't think immigration creates quite the same dynamic.

In fact, I think lax enforcement makes the problem worse because it makes it more difficult to distinguish who is here legally and who isn't. They can also develop more sophisticated support networks once they are here.

[PierzStyx]

I oppose prohibition but Immigration is not drugs or alcohol, your attempt to confuse the two and to ignore the fact that the deep state makes things illegal so they can profit by dominating the black market do nothing to help your position on Illegal Aliens, and your anarchist ramblings reveal your disconnect from reality.
Immigration enforcement has a history of reducing Illegal Aliens.

Adhering to the basic philosophies of Thomas Jefferson, federalism, and the US Constitution are "anarchist ramblings"? Thank you for demonstrating exactly how your ilk has no understanding of the ideals the USA was founded upon, Natural Law and individual human liberty. Anything that limits government in any way is always "anarchist" to you Big Government Progressives.

Immigration "enforcement" has created MORE illegal immigrants, not less.

The rapid escalation of border enforcement over the past three decades has backfired as a strategy to control undocumented immigration between Mexico and the United States, according to new research that suggests further militarization of the border is a waste of money.

“Rather than stopping undocumented Mexicans from coming to the U.S., greater enforcement stopped them from going home,” said Douglas Massey, one of the researchers and the Henry G. Bryant Professor of Sociology and Public Affairs at Princeton.

Advocated by bureaucrats, politicians and pundits, the militarization of the U.S. border with Mexico transformed undocumented Mexican migration from a circular flow of predominantly male workers going to a few states into a settled population of about 11 million in all 50 states, Massey said. From 1986 to 2010, the United States spent $35 billion on border enforcement and the net rate of undocumented population growth doubled, he said.

...

“Greater enforcement raised the costs of undocumented border crossing, which required undocumented migrants to stay longer in the U.S. to make a trip profitable,” he said. “Greater enforcement also increased the risk of death and injury during border crossing. As the costs and risks rose, migrants naturally minimized border crossing — not by remaining in Mexico but by staying in the United States.”

https://www.princeton.edu/news/2016/...searchers-find

Illegal immigration used to be largely confined to three states -California, Arizona, and Texas- and temporary- Mexican males would come to the US, work, and the go back to Mexico. As immigration laws have militarized the border more and more illegal immigrants were and are being forced to choose between going back to Mexico or staying in the US, and they have largely decided that it was of greater worth economically to stay in the USA. You can't argue with more money and more jobs. And further, now stuck in the US these immigrants had no need to stay mostly near the US-Mexico border, so they spread out all across the country. The end result of militarizing the border has been increases in permanent illegal immigrants and the wider spread of illegal immigrants to every continental and contiguous state of the Union.

And of course neither Trumps $25,000,000,000+ wall nor tighter border regulations will have any effect on nearly half of illegal immigrants in any way.

Nearly half of all the unauthorized migrants now living in the United States entered the country legally through a port of entry such as an airport or a border crossing point where they were subject to inspection by immigration officials, according to new estimates from the Pew Hispanic Center.

As much as 45% of the total unauthorized migrant population entered the country with visas that allowed them to visit or reside in the U.S. for a limited amount of time. Known as “overstayers,” these migrants became part of the unauthorized population when they remained in the country after their visas had expired.

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2006/05/2...nt-population/

Turns out the laws of supply and demand are not subject to the petty whims of central planners after all. Nothing is exempt from economics, not immigration nor any other of your pet Progressive plans to try and centrally plan society.

[oyarde]

Are sanctuary cities violating the constitution ? If so then all federal tax dollars withe the exception of social security , medicare and military pensions should be eliminated completely from those zip codes .

[CaptUSA]

Are sanctuary cities violating the constitution ? If so then all federal tax dollars withe the exception of social security , medicare and military pensions should be eliminated completely from those zip codes .

Ha ha... Good one. You know as well as I do that the only way to fix a government problem is by MOAR spending - not less. We need to beef up enforcement! Maybe give the government more power and money... then, like magic, the problem is solved!


And if not, we can always spend more. Rinse, repeat.

[Swordsmyth]

Adhering to the basic philosophies of Thomas Jefferson, federalism, and the US Constitution are "anarchist ramblings"? Thank you for demonstrating exactly how your ilk has no understanding of the ideals the USA was founded upon, Natural Law and individual human liberty. Anything that limits government in any way is always "anarchist" to you Big Government Progressives.

Immigration "enforcement" has created MORE illegal immigrants, not less.



Illegal immigration used to be largely confined to three states -California, Arizona, and Texas- and temporary- Mexican males would come to the US, work, and the go back to Mexico. As immigration laws have militarized the border more and more illegal immigrants were and are being forced to choose between going back to Mexico or staying in the US, and they have largely decided that it was of greater worth economically to stay in the USA. You can't argue with more money and more jobs. And further, now stuck in the US these immigrants had no need to stay mostly near the US-Mexico border, so they spread out all across the country. The end result of militarizing the border has been increases in permanent illegal immigrants and the wider spread of illegal immigrants to every continental and contiguous state of the Union.

And of course neither Trumps $25,000,000,000+ wall nor tighter border regulations will have any effect on nearly half of illegal immigrants in any way.



Turns out the laws of supply and demand are not subject to the petty whims of central planners after all. Nothing is exempt from economics, not immigration nor any other of your pet Progressive plans to try and centrally plan society.

Nonsense, Illegals have been choosing to stay because conditions in Mexico and other origin countries have gotten worse, as Zippy likes to point out most do not come from Mexico anymore, and border and internal enforcement have been deliberately lax for as long as anyone can remember.

[Swordsmyth]

Are sanctuary cities violating the constitution ? If so then all federal tax dollars withe the exception of social security , medicare and military pensions should be eliminated completely from those zip codes .

Ha ha... Good one. You know as well as I do that the only way to fix a government problem is by MOAR spending - not less. We need to beef up enforcement! Maybe give the government more power and money... then, like magic, the problem is solved!


And if not, we can always spend more. Rinse, repeat.

Actually the best way to solve the problem is both, cut off money to sanctuary cities, end welfare and increase enforcement.
You could save money on the enforcement by bringing the boys back home and putting them on the borders.

[Ender]

Actually the best way to solve the problem is both, cut off money to sanctuary cities, end welfare and increase enforcement.
You could save money on the enforcement by bringing the boys back home and putting them on the borders.

Ah....just what we need- more military taking over American cities. So much for freedom.

[Swordsmyth]

Ah....just what we need- more military taking over American cities. So much for freedom.

"On the borders" doesn't mean martial law, or "taking over American cities".

[CaptUSA]

"On the borders" doesn't mean martial law, or "taking over American cities".

Do you realize that currently "on the borders" means within 100 miles of the US border?



So there's your Constitution-free zone.

[Swordsmyth]

Do you realize that currently "on the borders" means within 100 miles of the US border?



So there's your Constitution-free zone.

That is not what I mean by "on the borders".

[Zippyjuan]

In any case Illegal Aliens are not drugs, enforcement will decrease their presence, more will leave and less will come.

That happened even before Trump- caused by the loss of jobs due to the recession.

[Swordsmyth]

That happened even before Trump- caused by the loss of jobs due to the recession.

And now MORE will leave and LESS will come.

[Zippyjuan]

And now MORE will leave and LESS will come.

As our police state continues to grow and our freedoms reduced little by little.

[Swordsmyth]

As our police state continues to grow and our freedoms reduced little by little.

Bunk.

[Zippyjuan]

Bunk.

Perhaps hiring more government agents is reducing the police state? (Trump wants to add another 15,000).

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

As our police state continues to grow and our freedoms reduced little by little.

I always have to laugh when hearing progressives say this. They want government out of certain areas, but then want the strongest gov possible in other areas. Roughly corresponds to the neo-con who (again roughly) wants little gov in economic matters but strong government in social matters.

You can't have it both ways. If you grow government in one area, you grow it in other areas. The Frankenstein you build is the monster that you get.

[Ender]

I always have to laugh when hearing progressives say this. They want government out of certain areas, but then want the strongest gov possible in other areas. Roughly corresponds to the neo-con who (again roughly) wants little gov in economic matters but strong government in social matters.

You can't have it both ways. If you grow government in one area, you grow it in other areas. The Frankenstein you build is the monster that you get.

Zip's statement is still correct-

[Zippyjuan]

I always have to laugh when hearing progressives say this. They want government out of certain areas, but then want the strongest gov possible in other areas. Roughly corresponds to the neo-con who (again roughly) wants little gov in economic matters but strong government in social matters.

You can't have it both ways. If you grow government in one area, you grow it in other areas. The Frankenstein you build is the monster that you get.

That covers Republicans too. Less social spending, more police/ military spending. Let me practice my own Christian religion but no other religions allowed (Muslims). Same big government- just different priorities.

[Swordsmyth]

Perhaps hiring more government agents is reducing the police state? (Trump wants to add another 15,000).

Zip's statement is still correct-

Increasing enforcement in a neglected area is not creating a police state, unless you are an Anarchist.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Zip's statement is still correct-

That won't matter if your approach is incorrect.

[Swordsmyth]

That covers Republicans too. Less social spending, more police/ military spending. Let me practice my own Christian religion but no other religions allowed (Muslims).

GEE WHIZ! government should do some things and shouldn't do others, Who'd a thunk it?

P.S. I want less police/military spending in general.