Illegal immigration crowd is going to find Texas to be a much less hospitable place now that the sanctuary city ban has been signed into law.
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott on Sunday night signed what he calls a ban on so-called “sanctuary cities” that allows police to ask about a person’s immigration status and threatens sheriffs with jail if they don’t cooperate with federal authorities. He did so over intense opposition from immigrant-rights groups
I need to correct something before allowing this blockquote to continue…ILLEGAL immigrant-rights groups. Ok…
and Democrats, who say the law echoes Arizona’s immigration crackdown in 2010 that prompted national controversy and lawsuits.
Yes, the “controversy” is enforcing immigration law. That’s only controversial to the left, who views illegal immigrants as a voter gravy train. It’s one thing to have a debate about what to do about the millions who are already here (though I suspect most Silence Is Consent readers are for deportation) because it’s a topic worthy of discussion. But it’s something else entirely to say immigration law shouldn’t be enforce, and it’s a testament to how dumb we have become as a nation that the Democrats take their exploitative and lawlessness-tolerant position on illegal immigration and people accept even one syllable of it.
Abbott, a Republican in his first term, took the unusual step of signing the bill on Facebook with no public notice in advance. He said Texas residents expect lawmakers to “keep us safe” and said similar laws have already been tested in federal court, where opponents have said the bill likely will be immediately challenged.
“Let’s face it, the reason why so many people come to America is because we are a nation of laws and Texas is doing its part to keep it that way,” Abbott said. His spokesman, John Wittman, later said they chose to sign the bill on a Facebook livestream because that’s “where most people are getting their news nowadays.”
The Democrats have an unexpected ally in this, the police chiefs of Texas’s major cities.
“This is not a political issue for police chiefs. It’s a practical issue that will affect public safety.”
The proposed legislation, formally known as Senate Bill 4, calls for local police departments to take a greater role in enforcing federal immigration laws. The police chiefs’ letter, addressed to various media outlets, warns that immigration enforcement is a “federal obligation” and argues that any state efforts to tackle the issue will be “ineffective.”
This OLD canard that local law enforcement has nothing to do with federal law enforcement has been dispensed with a million times already. Local law enforcement doesn’t sit on their hands and wait for the federal government to get involved when a bank is robbed or when a person is kidnapped. Both of those are federal crimes and they more often than not respond first to those. It’s not that they can’t enforce immigration law, it’s that they don’t want to.
The police chiefs’ letter Friday said that “broad mandates” like SB 4 will further strain the relationship between local law enforcement and diverse communities. That division will lead to more crimes against immigrants and in the broader communities, they predicted.
That might be true, but it might lead to less if these (ILLEGAL) immigrant communities self-deport, or (better yet, in my opinion) get right with the law and obtain a legal status. What will definitely be true is that crime perpetrated by illegal immigrants on American citizens will decrease. San Francisco might be proud of their petulant and blatant disregard for the law, but Texas is working to make sure that state doesn’t have it’s own Katie Steinle
The chiefs also argued SB 4 — which they described as “political pandering” — will create an unfunded mandate for local police departments if it becomes law.
What is the “unfunded mandate?” Enforcement of law on the books?
“At a time of strained law enforcement budgets and critically low jail space, narrowing the focus to violent criminals, human traffickers and members of organized crime syndicates is critical,” the chiefs’ letter stated. “Requiring local law enforcement to prioritize immigration efforts without adequate funding or increased support … will hinder an agency’s ability to focus its limited resources on the unique needs of the community it serves.”
If certain areas of Texas are gathering places for illegal immigration how does enforcement of immigration law not count as a “unique need” to these cities? Why is there no “funding” to enforce this law already?
These are lame excuses from political hack police chiefs who are totally uninterested in doing their job. Meanwhile, San Antonio police chief William McManus, an early and very vocal critic of this law, suspended officers during the 2016 campaign for posing for pictures with Trump and wearing “Make America Great Again” hats. While the reason for the suspension is arguably justified (officers shouldn’t be showing support for candidates while on duty) it also goes to show that the rank and file don’t necessarily share the views of their leadership on this issue.
Given the border patrol union endorsed Trump in 2016 as well it’s safe to say the narrative the left is trying to push that law enforcement isn’t with bans on sanctuary cities is probably more rooted in fiction than not.
To end this post on a moment of zen here is Governor Abbott signing the bill into law