Anonymous E replied with this 3 months ago, 8 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^][v]#1,395,464
@1,395,245 (boof)
im laying down eating popcorn watching criminals get arrested on my screen.
your kind are screaming in the streets dressed up like demons so that corporations can use desperate slaves to push down wages and put more strain on housing so landlords get rich.
Anonymous B replied with this 3 months ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^][v]#1,395,469
@1,395,460 (Lady D !Pool..v42s)
Federal immigration laws, passed by congress. You can't just pass an municipal ordinance to override them. It's also true that states have no right to make their own immigration policies, that's all set by congress in DC.
For a specific statute that can be cited in charges against insurrectionist mayors and councils I'd say 8 U.S. Code § 1373 which prohibits local governments from restricting communication with federal immigration authorities regarding an individual’s citizenship or immigration status. There are staff at the white house who have already said that federal funds can be withheld when local police don't comply with federal agents, and that when the declarations are made by the city it is enough to invoke the insurrection act.
Lady D !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 months ago, 5 hours later, 1 week after the original post[^][v]#1,395,525
@previous (B)
Oregon law prohibits assisting state and local law enforcement from assisting federal enforcement agencies, I don't believe information about federal immigration status is being blocked.
Whitehouse staff who are former podcasters can say what they want about federal funding that wasn't what I was asking about so it doesn't really matter. what kind of declarations are actually being made that pass the threshold of invoking the insurrection act?
Anonymous B replied with this 3 months ago, 11 hours later, 1 week after the original post[^][v]#1,395,624
@1,395,525 (Lady D !Pool..v42s)
They are blocking information, they are required to tell ICE when they have an illegal. Instead they've been assisting them in evading law enforcement, some sanctuary cities have had judges sneaking them out back doors to sneak past federal law enforcement.
Just as it's illegal for a civilian to hide a fugitive, police that obstruct justice are also breaking the law.
Anyways, all of the "legality" of it is kinda moot from the moral standpoint. It was totally "legal" for German forces to go around rounding up specific types offolk, it was totally legal to own people, and it's apparently totally legal for Israel to bomb the shit out of children at the smallest provocation.
Lady D !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 months ago, 2 days later, 1 week after the original post[^][v]#1,396,182
@1,395,704 (E) @previous (B)
Sorry I didn't make up the rules, non citizens are still covered under the constitution, so things like due process still apply.
Anonymous E replied with this 3 months ago, 23 hours later, 1 week after the original post[^][v]#1,396,492
@previous (Lady D !Pool..v42s)
That's their mission, yes. You can't have ICE do it alone when insurrectionists are forming mobs to attack federal officers.
Lady D !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 months ago, 5 hours later, 1 week after the original post[^][v]#1,396,567
@1,396,492 (E)
That's not their mission, no. They can not legally carry out ICE tasks, although, they would be more apt to the task humanely and with restraint given the more adequate training they are required to go through.