“Sanctuary State” Nonsense

On May 8th our City Council is going to be discussing the issue of joining several other California cities and counties in opposing this state’s declaration of “sanctuary state” status for illegal aliens.

I plan to be there, and address them on this issue.

Having spoken before the Council before I know there’s a time limit of three minutes per person, and I don’t think I can say all I want to in that time frame, so I’m going to put some of my thoughts here.

In 2010 Arizona enacted a law authorizing their police to enquire into the immigration status of people with whom the cops were in contact. That law was challenged in the case of Arizona v. United States “…on the theory that Arizona was trying to move in on the federal government’s superior power to enforce federal immigration laws”, and the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) held that several provisions of the Arizona law were unconstitutional because “…they either operated in areas solely controlled by federal policy, or they interfered with federal enforcement efforts.” (Link)

When SCOTUS issued their ruling in 2012, the illegal alien lobby jumped for joy. How come now, all of a sudden, they think it’s okay for this state to do the very same thing that Arizona did, namely “move in on the federal government’s superior power to enforce federal immigration laws” and “interfere with federal enforcement efforts”?

Got hypocrisy much?

I have little doubt the Council will hear a litany of illegal alien sob stories. In anticipation, I’ve got a little sob story of my own.

Kate Steinle was strolling along the pier in San Francisco with her father when she was shot down and killed by an illegal alien named Jose Inez Garcia Zarate. Zarate had already been deported five times; he was on probation in Texas; and had already been convicted of seven felonies. But because of San Fran’s “sanctuary city” policies, Zarate had been released from the San Francisco County Jail to roam free and ultimately kill Steinle.

Some others: Edwin Jackson killed by Manuel Orrego-Savala; Jamiel Shaw Jr. murdered by Pedro Espinoza; Sheriff’s Deputy Danny Oliver murdered by Luis Enrique Monroy Bracamontes: our own Sheriff’s Deputy David March was murdered by Armando Jose Arroyo Garcia; and there are a host of others, not only those murdered, but victims of other crimes, too.

We hear politician/cops (who shouldn’t be confused with actual street cops who work for a living) talking about “sanctuary” – meaning the refusal to enforce the law – allowing people to “come out of the shadows” and somehow help them enforce other, more palatable (I suppose) laws.

Maybe we should consider letting drug dealers “come out of the shadows”, too. Or embezzlers. Maybe thieves and shoplifters. In fact, we can refuse to enforce all kinds of laws and let the offenders all “come out of the shadows” if we want. Why limit it to just illegal aliens?

One other thing. The illegal alien apologists try to obfuscate this issue by conflating legal immigrants and illegal aliens. It’s intellectually dishonest. The vast majority of those of us who oppose “sanctuary” or regularization of illegal aliens is perfectly clear about the distinction between the two, and view legal immigrants as an entirely separate and distinct group. This issue is unrelated to them.

They also talk about this country being a “nation of immigrants”, as if American Indians are the only people “native” to this continent. But that’s also specious. The term “native Americans” is generally, and incorrectly, applied to American Indians, who are the aboriginal – the original inhabitants of any region – people of this continent, but even they were “immigrants” in that they got here from Asia. So just like those Indians, anybody born here is a “native” of this country, simply having arrived later. Any person born here is a “native American”, by definition.

So there we have it. I’m certainly urging the City Council to move forward in opposing this “sanctuary state” nonsense. We’ll see what happens at the meeting.

 

 

©Brian Baker 2018

 

(Also published today in my local newspaper, The Signal)

 

 

Advertisements

13 comments on ““Sanctuary State” Nonsense

  1. Kathy says:

    That’s all good stuff, Brian, and I don’t know the make-up of your area, but in the interest of holding their attention, and simplicity, I’d stay away from most of what you said, except for hammering home the Kate Steinle and the like stories. It has to be relatable for your audience, and some of us tend to dwell on history and facts, which just confuses and loses some folks.

    How does it affect their bottom line? Their votes? Their schools? Maybe their own neighborhoods. By no means, am I any kind of coach, and you’ve done this before anyway, so you’ll be great and I look forward to hearing what they decide. It would be so good to see more CA towns do this and tell Moonbeam to stuff it.

    You’re positively spot on comparing this to Arizona – best of luck!!

    • BrianR says:

      Hey, thanks for the kind words, Kathy. I appreciate them, as well as the advice.

      I’m actually pretty well known locally as being a conservative firebrand, and know how to hit the emotional chords, so yes… I’ll be staying away from the more mundane stuff and hitting the emotional highs. That’s why I’m glad the local paper also published it as a column today. Everyone on the Council reads The Signal, so I really don’t have to simply read it to them again.

      In fact, there are a couple of other aspects of the law which I couldn’t include in the column because of length limitations, and those are the points I plan to make, as well as submitting the column itself to them at the meeting as part of the record.

      Thanks again. Good stuff!

  2. Hardnox says:

    Well stated Brian.

    My beef with all the ‘sanctuary” crap is why are our elected officials more concerned with illegals and their safety as opposed to actual citizens? What a concept.

    Further, any and all elected officials who endorse sanctuary anything have abrogated oath of office and should/must be terminated immediately. There are methods to do this but it varies by State. ditto with judges. the problem is few want to risk being labeled “racist’ when race has nothing to do with wanting our laws enforced. Again, what a concept.

    Of course, we all know why lefties embrace illegals since the US Census counts heads instead of citizens. If illegals were gone there would be a huge upset to the 435 fixed members of the House of Representatives which is the crux of the whole thing.

    • BrianR says:

      Thanks, Nox.

      You left out the part about illegals being the next batch of leftie voters.

      After Reagan signed Simpson-Mazzoli into law in 1986 and gave amnesty to about 3 million, they’ve ended up being Dem/socialist voters by about 70%.

      • Hardnox says:

        True enough about lefty voters, especially in your state which issues them drivers licenses and motor-voter registrations BUT it’s about seats and where they are. Not all illegals vote.

  3. CW says:

    All great points and very well-stated, Brian.

    All I can say is: talk fast!

    • BrianR says:

      LOL!

      I’ll sound like one of those announcements on TV ads about the disclaimers. A thousand words a minute.

      Thanks for the kind words.

  4. Terry says:

    Brian I wish you the best of luck with your efforts on the 8th. I expect you will be encountering the same ilk of repugnant, smug, elitist council members as the residents of Costa Mesa did last week :

    I sure would like to be there to hear you put them in their place.

    • BrianR says:

      Thanks, Terry.

      Interesting video. Fortunately our City Council members are actually, for the most part, conservatives, so we won’t be dealing with that kind of problem as we see in the video.

      But it still promises to be fun, since a couple of illegal alien lobby groups have targeted our Tuesday meeting for “action”. I’m REALLY looking forward to it, since I’m an “action” kinda guy… if ya know what I mean.

      I’ll be posting an after-action report here. Stay tuned…

  5. captbogus2 says:

    I’m glad you brought a point up that irritates the schidt out of me. Every time I have to fill out a government (or any other) form that asks the question: “Are You (a) African American; (b) Hispanic)..etc I figure since my scene of nativity was Texas and Texas is part of America then I can truthfully answer “Native American”… Never been questioned on it yet…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s