City in California votes to exempt itself from state's sanctuary law
A city in California has voted to opt out of the state's so-called sanctuary laws.
The city council in Los Alamitos, a city located in Orange County, voted 4 to 1 earlier this week to opt out of the law, CNBC reported.
"This is important for us, for our city, for our community," Warren Kusumoto, the mayor pro tempore of Los Alamitos said ahead of the vote.
Kusumoto talked about the importance of the local measure, citing "a conflict between two governing documents - the Constitution of the United States and the state constitution itself."
The city's mayor said he has received calls from other city council members and mayors that are "interesting in being part of this."
"They really want to know what was the process and are trying to get advice on how to go to the next steps," Mayor Troy Edgar said.
In order for the order to take effect, a second vote must be held, according to CNBC.
California Assembly member Wendy Carrillo, a Democrat who represents parts of Los Angeles, said the Los Alamitos City Council is "egregiously misinterpreting the U.S. Constitution and are on the wrong side of history."
"Los Alamitos has an opportunity to protect its residents, but is instead siding with a racist and xenophobic Trump administration hell-bent on instilling fear in immigrants across the nation," Carillo said in a statement, according to CNBC.
Earlier this month, the Trump administration filed a lawsuit against California over the state's immigration laws.
The suit aims to block the so-called sanctuary laws California's legislature passed last year in response to the Trump administration's immigration enforcement measures.
The Trump administration has been highly critical of California's sanctuary cities and administration officials have said they will crack down on policies that limit local law enforcement's cooperation with federal authorities.
The Justice Department is arguing that one of the state's laws - which in certain circumstances prevents local officials from giving information to immigration agents or from handing over detained immigrants to federal custody - is unconstitutional and violates a federal statute on information sharing.
Tags
Who is online
117 visitors
Seems like a bit of a constotutional crisis in California, the City decides not to obey the law the state passed to try to not obey Federal Law.
I wonder when all this will end up at the SCOTUS for a decision?
They have the right to do that. No problem.
Well this is new. What law did the state pass to ignore federal law? Please provide the actual text in the law that does this.
I'll let you look up what laws the state and the cities are breaking by declaring themselves sanctuaries to illegal aliens. I'd start with Federal Immigration Law and work outward from there.
So you got nothing? I went through them all and found no language regarding the State of California to ignore any federal laws. What you got now?
The lawsuit challenges the Immigrant Worker Protection Act ( HB 450 ), the Inspection and Review of Facilities Housing Federal Detainees law ( AB 103 ); and the California Values Act ( SB 54 ).
You might want to try reading them again.
You got nothing either, huh?
Yea, thy say nothing about ignoring Federal Law. can you quote me the passage you see that says they are supposed to ignore federal law, I'm just not seeing it.
This is why they keep saying "read it yourself", however they aren't fooling anyone anymore. They're just quoting FoxNews or Breitbart headlines, without bothering to check if the story is real or not.
Do you have anything like this or another issue/shale perhaps that could lead to your state trying to split up along urban/rural lines?
Years ago, NYC wanted to secede from New York State. Upstate folks had no problem with this, but the NYC types didn't like the fact that all aid and tax money collected upstate would stop flowing towards the city........
Rural areas of NY, Md, Illinois, and Ca should separate from their states and create new states.
If they want to commit their city resources to helping the feds that's entirely up to them. I'm sure the feds will reciprocate by issuing some parking tickets or something won't they?
What in the world are you trying to say? Your comment doesn't really make any sense.
Really? Wow, pretty simple.
Why should local government spend money to do federal's job, when there is no chance that the fed's will reciprocate or pay back the monies spent..
Clear enough for you?
Red states are providing support to the feds in immigration law enforcement in their areas to free up more ICE officers 👮♀️ to be in sanctuary areas.
That, too, is their choice. Here in CA we pay considerably more fed taxes than is spent here in order to support all the white trash welfare queens in the south.
If they have all that extra money to do the fed's job for them, then that's their choice. Supreme Court has stated 2 or 3 times in case law that immigration enforcement is the fed's job only, state involvement is voluntary.
But in the case of Californication the state is making certain by law that local governments and law enforcement can’t support ICE even if they want to. It’s that kind of interference that triggered the recent federal lawsuit against the state regime.
We don't care if Los Alamitos opts out. We're not forcing them to do anything.
Well, as no one was talking to you...........
WHat resources will they be spending? Time to notify the Federal Agencies if they have an illegal in custody? Obviously they feel that it is something they should do-you know, cooperate with other agencies in pursuit of following federal law.
the Los Alamitos City Council is "egregiously misinterpreting the U.S. Constitution and are on the wrong side of history."
Seems to me that the California Assembly member needs to re-read the U. S. Constitution and note that Fed law ALWAYS trumps state/local laws.
I spent a lot of time in Los Al as my Army Reserve HQ is there. It is a lovely city and they have to do what is right for them.
They have to "do what is right for them"? Then they will reap what they sow. Please familiarize yourself with the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution (Article 6, Clause [paragraph] 2):
It is a good start
If there is such a 'conflict between' the Federal and CA constitution, it has existed for long before any of the recent laws were passed since NONE of them Amend the CA Constitution.
Bottom line is this. There are a portion of the electorate that would like to see a well funded deportation force. An entity that has the resources to detain, imprison and deport any segment of the population that the government deems hostile or illegal by their existence.
Once this force in place the targets will move. Should The Statue Of Liberty be torn down, turned into scrap, loaded on a boat and sent to China?
I believe that the truth of the matter is, there are people that want California to not stabd in the way of federal agencies enforcing laws already on the books. No need to create some mythical force.
Exactly. And no drama over the Statue of Liberty either as most of us have no problem at all with legal immigration.
This is great news. Now we have local cities and counties defying the state to side with the federal government. Hopefully California will break apart as a state over this issue.