Home | About | Donate

'We Do Not Stand Down': Sanctuary Cities Vow to Fight Trump's Order


#1

'We Do Not Stand Down': Sanctuary Cities Vow to Fight Trump's Order

Nadia Prupis, staff writer

Sanctuary cities are already fighting back against President Donald Trump's executive order on Wednesday to strip them of funding if they protect undocumented immigrants.

Mayors and lawmakers from around the country assured Trump that they would fight him on the order and refuse to enforce federal immigration laws. The promises of shelter came one after the other on Wednesday and Thursday.


#2

This was what was taught to me throughout my Economic minor: In our country, we are capitalists for our economic view. We are to have an ever growing GDP. To have this, population must be taken into account. This means for more money to be lent, companies to grow, etc. there must be a level of population growth to coincide with all of this. Immigration is the answer, unless families want to have 4-6 children per family. Immigration allows growth without putting strain on lower and middle class folks. I stand by this understanding but only because i know the math, capitalist philosophy, and the statistics behind it all. One person cant make 2 peoples money and so on. Pretty basic logic.


#3

"Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and daring, those ripples can build a current that can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance". ~Robert Kennedy


#4

Let's be clear - this mayoral response for protecting "sanctuary city" status among America's largest municipalities has less to do with humanitarian concerns and more to do with the protection of the businesses who depend on cheap labor in order to maintain their bottom lines. The wholesale detention and deportation of illegal aliens has been going on for years under President Obama and now that a wildly unpopular President wants to continue that legacy, all of sudden America's mayors discover their moral backbones?

Again, if this was Hillary doing the same thing, not a word of protest would have arisen except from those people who actually care about human rights.

Be careful of who you ally yourselves with lest the sword you hand them ends up in your back.


#5

I think it is a bit presumptuous to declare that if Hillary were to have imposed such arbitrary and mean spirited sanctions on sanctuary cities, people would have looked the other way. The lens through which you are filtering the news and people's behaviors is cynical, but not necessarily accurate.


#6

The fact that this money would have been spent on public safety does not have to translate into disaster and crime-ridden cities. This is the opportunity to convert police departments into community oriented agencies that enlist the assistance and collaboration of the entire community to support a mutually beneficial relationship. It's been done before, it can be done again.


#7

What she says gets to the heart of the matter ..

Minneapolis Mayor Vows To Fight Trump Immigration Order


#8

Where were the mass protests when Obama became #1 in immigrant detentions and deportations in American History? Did we hear anything on MSNBC, CNN, or any other MSM outlet as these massive detention and deportation centers were built under Obama's watch? Trump now has at is disposal the most massive detention and deportation machine imaginable and he didn't have to anything to get it built.

At least George W. Bush understood that illegal aliens were essential to the economy. Obama's high-fiance masters don't use migrant labor, so he didn't lose any support with his deportation program. Mayors, on the other hand, depend on local business owners for their political support and THEY depend on cheap immigrant labor who can be paid less than minimum wage with no benefits. However, going after Obama would've been political suicide because you can't be critical of the leader of your Party unless you don't want to keep your job. It would've been the same way with Hillary, although I think some might have spoken out if they were running in a close race with a Republican. However, now that Trump is President, they can come out with their fists swinging in order to convince their constituents that they give a damn about human rights, which of course, they don't.

This is all academic anyway because if Trump wants to expand on what Obama already started there isn't a whole lot individual cities can do about it short of hiding refugees and illegal aliens in attics and basements. "Sanctuary City" isn't even a legal designation so if Homeland Security wants to round people up and send them back to wherever they came from, there isn't really any legal cover for the cities themselves to stop them.


#9

Much of what you say is true. Obama deported more undocumented immigrants than any other president, almost as many as all 20th century presidents combined. Only half of those he deported had criminal records. He's incarcerated thousands of women and children in squalid conditions in detention pens along the southern border. And there have been few if any in his own party who have castigated him for this despicable behavior.

And it's also true that both big cities and the agricultural sectors rely on cheap illegal labor.

However, having said all that, what Trump has proposed creates an entirely new problem - the federal government is expecting local law enforcement to do the fed's job, arresting undocumented immigrants, and has threatened withholding federal funding from those cities and states ("sanctuary" cities and states tolerated under Obama) that do not comply. This would necessarily compromise the ability of the local police to do their job as the undocumented would risk arrest and deportation were they to come forward to report a crime or testify as a witness to a crime. That's the problem.

Check out the video I posted of the Minneapolis mayor - she lays out the issue quite succinctly.


#10

Hillary wouldn't have threaten people either.


#11

Thank you for that important reminder.


#12

Where have been mass protests ( with the exception of DAPL) for the rights and treatment of our own tribal people who have been here for thousands of years?


#13

Still with the Hillary.


#14

According to the ACLU "Any attempt from the federal government to commandeer state and local governments into carrying out federal policies will violate the 10th Amendment, and attempts to coerce local entities into action by withholding funds violates the Spending Clause of the U.S. Constitution." "The law is clear on this, and President Trump is out of line." He seems to be out of line on just about everything he does.


#15

and just what is he on line on ?


#16

It's like the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793 where northern states were compelled to cooperate with southern states for the recovery of runaway slaves. If this goes through, then I suppose we might see a return of the Underground Railroad as Syrian refugees are smuggled to Canada or Mexico.


#17

Wikipedia -
The Sanctuary Movement

The Sanctuary Movement was a religious and political campaign in the United States that began in the early 1980s to provide safe-haven for Central American refugees fleeing civil conflict. It responded to federal immigration policies that made obtaining asylum difficult for Central Americans.

At its peak, Sanctuary involved over 500 congregations in the United States that, by declaring themselves official “sanctuaries,” committed to providing shelter, material goods and often legal advice to Central American refugees. Various denominations were involved, including the Lutherans, United Church of Christ, Roman Catholics, Presbyterians, Methodists, Baptists, Jews, Unitarian Universalists, Quakers, and Mennonites.

More are link .

I knew people involved back in the 80s & 90s.
I imagine the same networks are still operating now.