Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted April 25, 2017 Another liberal hack. Issued a restraining order against group who outed Planned Parenthood harvesting. Also raised $200,000 for Obama and personally donated $30,000 http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/04/25/trump-sanctuary-city-law-blocked-judge-san-francisco-obama-donor-william-orrick Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cdub100 3,384 Posted April 25, 2017 Okay let me guess. This judge is on the west coast, probably cali He was probably appointed by Obama Obama or Hillary or Pocahontas was in his area recently for a visit. How did I do? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Baker Boy 1,485 Posted April 25, 2017 A Federal Judge Rules that municipalities do not have to follow Federal Law. This Is Huge! Welcome back states rights! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gepetto 988 Posted April 25, 2017 This was a judge too: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gepetto 988 Posted April 25, 2017 Another liberal hack. Issued a restraining order against group who outed Planned Parenthood harvesting. Also raised $200,000 for Obama and personally donated $30,000 http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/04/25/trump-sanctuary-city-law-blocked-judge-san-francisco-obama-donor-william-orrick Obama looks like a monkey. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Saint Elistan 106 Posted April 25, 2017 Not to interrupt the circle jerk going on here, but this is a pretty clear cut ruling for ANY judge. The President doesn't have constitutional authority to attach stipulations to already appropriated federal funds. That would take a literal act of congress. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
supermike80 1,287 Posted April 26, 2017 There are positives to this. I've said many times I think I'm middle of the road politically. But I got so pissed when liberals were acting like Hitler was elected. I kept saying we do have checks and balances. They work. Liberals covered their ears, went la la la la, and posted on fb. At least this shows why this nation is one of the best in the world. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 719 Posted April 26, 2017 Not to interrupt the circle jerk going on here, but this is a pretty clear cut ruling for ANY judge. The President doesn't have constitutional authority to attach stipulations to already appropriated federal funds. That would take a literal act of congress. Pfft...facts and laws and authority are meaningless to Trumo and his defenders. All things opposing him are fake or liberal and nothing more. Very unfair. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 12,659 Posted April 26, 2017 Pfft...facts and laws and authority are meaningless to Trumo and his defenders. All things opposing him are fake or liberal and nothing more. Very unfair. You should try and bring something to the table once in a while like Saint just did. But I doubt it, you'll just continue with the same old boring tripe. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rholio 339 Posted April 26, 2017 Another lose for Trump, and for everyone else. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reality 2,710 Posted April 26, 2017 Turns out the judge raised 200k for Obama. Not surprising, not sure why anybody is ok with what these cities are doing. These are exactly the types of issues that guarantee the republicans stay in power. Enjoy the battle, you're losing the war. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
5-Points 2,733 Posted April 26, 2017 Wake me when they start ignoring federal gun laws. Oh... wait Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted April 26, 2017 Another lose for Trump, and for everyone else. Loss? Another phale for the left. Didn't Obama threaten to withhold Federal Dollars if states didn't adopt his transgender rules for schools? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NewbieJr 540 Posted April 26, 2017 Poor Donald keeps getting his nose slapped. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 719 Posted April 26, 2017 Loss? Another phale for the left. Didn't Obama threaten to withhold Federal Dollars if states didn't adopt his transgender rules for schools? How many executive orders has he had blocked by those who actually know the law? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mike Honcho 4,039 Posted April 26, 2017 Turns out the judge raised 200k for Obama. Not surprising, not sure why anybody is ok with what these cities are doing. These are exactly the types of issues that guarantee the republicans stay in power. Enjoy the battle, you're losing the war. Judges ruling by the law as written and sheeples who don't understanding that being herded by a demagogue...can't argue with that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KSB2424 3,083 Posted April 26, 2017 1. Looks like Donald may have went about this the wrong way. Shame on him. 2. The fact that this is an actual issue where our President and Republican representatives have to find a way to enforce federal immigration laws on cities or municipalities who are outright ignoring them is MORE shameful. 3. I don't know campaign laws, but federal judges giving or accepting money to candidates seems odd and doesn't pass a smell test. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kilroy69 994 Posted April 26, 2017 This is getting absurd. Liberal hack judges blocking presidential orders? Gimme a focking break. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NewbieJr 540 Posted April 26, 2017 This is getting absurd. Liberal hack judges blocking presidential orders? Gimme a focking break. So you believe in dictatorships where the President makes any rule he wants? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bandrus1 413 Posted April 26, 2017 This is getting absurd. Liberal hack judges blocking presidential orders? Gimme a focking break. oh this hasnt happened before? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NewbieJr 540 Posted April 26, 2017 This is getting absurd. Liberal hack judges blocking presidential orders? Gimme a focking break. I seem to recall an entire party blocking a President's choice for SCOTUS when he still had a year to go in his term. Life isn't always fair. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cruzer 1,992 Posted April 26, 2017 I seem to recall an entire party blocking a President's choice for SCOTUS when he still had a year to go in his term. Life isn't always fair. Psst, don't tell anyone else - but nobody on the Right was crying when Obama was getting blocked.. If this got out, some would look awfully silly crying about the authority of "partisan hack Federal Judges". Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted April 26, 2017 2. The fact that this is an actual issue where our President and Republican representatives have to find a way to enforce federal immigration laws on cities or municipalities who are outright ignoring them is MORE shameful. Maybe Trump should take these cities to court then let these Liberal Judges try to rule the cities are allowed to refuse to follow Federal Immigration Laws. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 719 Posted April 26, 2017 3. I don't know campaign laws, but federal judges giving or accepting money to candidates seems odd and doesn't pass a smell test. Agree here. Judges should remain neutral in such appearances. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 12,659 Posted April 26, 2017 If I'm Trump I start verifying employment in the restaurants in these cities. Want to play? Let's play. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NewbieJr 540 Posted April 26, 2017 If I'm Trump I start verifying employment in the restaurants in these cities. Want to play? Let's play. Yes, because Trump really needs to have even more people hate him. Is he shooting for 20% approval? lol Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 12,659 Posted April 26, 2017 Yes, because Trump really needs to have even more people hate him. Is he shooting for 20% approval? lol You're in favor of illegal immigration? How come? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NewbieJr 540 Posted April 26, 2017 You're in favor of illegal immigration? How come? I'm in favor of giving those who are already here a path to citizenship. hth Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 12,659 Posted April 26, 2017 I'm in favor of giving those who are already here a path to citizenship. hth Well that would have to be voted on. In the meantime, we have laws already voted on. So just disregard those laws? Why? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kanil 519 Posted April 26, 2017 1. Looks like Donald may have went about this the wrong way. Shame on him. 2. The fact that this is an actual issue where our President and Republican representatives have to find a way to enforce federal immigration laws on cities or municipalities who are outright ignoring them is MORE shameful. 3. I don't know campaign laws, but federal judges giving or accepting money to candidates seems odd and doesn't pass a smell test. Good posting. Those first two points are spot on. (Not that the third isn't but I'm 100% positive it's super common on both sides) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KSB2424 3,083 Posted April 26, 2017 I'm in favor of giving those who are already here a path to citizenship. hth Cool, me too. Doesn't mean a city should not report illegals who commit crimes or refuse Federal Agents access to illegals if needed. Pssst. Sanctuary cities have been around before Trump was sworn in, this isn't a "Trump" issue. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reality 2,710 Posted April 26, 2017 Judges ruling by the law as written and sheeples who don't understanding that being herded by a demagogue...can't argue with that. Yes Honcho, we're all idiots. How about forming a sentence with comprehensible English next time? Thanks in advance. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NewbieJr 540 Posted April 26, 2017 Cool, me too. Doesn't mean a city should not report illegals who commit crimes or refuse Federal Agents access to illegals if needed. Pssst. Sanctuary cities have been around before Trump was sworn in, this isn't a "Trump" issue. I am for the deportation of illegals that commit crimes. (cue the retards saying "it's a crime for illegals to be here in the first place") Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mobb_deep 917 Posted April 26, 2017 1. Looks like Donald may have went about this the wrong way. Shame on him. 2. The fact that this is an actual issue where our President and Republican representatives have to find a way to enforce federal immigration laws on cities or municipalities who are outright ignoring them is MORE shameful. 3. I don't know campaign laws, but federal judges giving or accepting money to candidates seems odd and doesn't pass a smell test. Maybe I don't fully understand what's going on here, but living in California it's obviously a hot topic. How I understand it, California is just not using local funds and law enforcement to perform what should be the job of the federal government to begin with (border protection and immigration). I don't really see a problem with that? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 12,659 Posted April 26, 2017 I am for the deportation of illegals that commit crimes. (cue the retards saying "it's a crime for illegals to be here in the first place") Well Newbie, they can't get deported if the local cops don't turn them over to ICE. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 12,659 Posted April 26, 2017 Maybe I don't fully understand what's going on here, but living in California it's obviously a hot topic. How I understand it, California is just not using local funds and law enforcement to perform what should be the job of the federal government to begin with (border protection and immigration). I don't really see a problem with that? They are refusing to cooperate with federal immigration agencies. LAPD locks up an illegal immigrant for a crime and they don't notify ICE so he can possibly be deported. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KSB2424 3,083 Posted April 26, 2017 Maybe I don't fully understand what's going on here, but living in California it's obviously a hot topic. How I understand it, California is just not using local funds and law enforcement to perform what should be the job of the federal government to begin with (border protection and immigration). I don't really see a problem with that? HB sorta hit on it above. I think there are varying degrees of a "Sanctuary City". It's one thing to do what you state above. Okay fine, whatever. But there are cities that outright refuse to work with Federal Agencies. That is the aspect that most people can't understand. As an example: Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, an undocumented immigrant, had seven felony convictions in the United States and had been deported from the country five times. Yet, the city of San Francisco declined to detain him for Immigration and Customs Enforcement Officials (ICE) officials and released him into the community. In July 2015, Lopez-Sanchez was charged with murdering Katie Steinle in San Francisco. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted April 26, 2017 I am for the deportation of illegals that commit crimes. (cue the retards saying "it's a crime for illegals to be here in the first place") So you're aware you're ignorant? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mobb_deep 917 Posted April 26, 2017 HB sorta hit on it above. I think there are varying degrees of a "Sanctuary City". It's one thing to do what you state above. Okay fine, whatever. But there are cities that outright refuse to work with Federal Agencies. That is the aspect that most people can't understand. As an example: Got it. That, I 100% disagree with. Even if a beat cop picks up an illegal with a prior felony, it should trigger some sort of system, where immigration authorities are notified and they're processed properly. I just don't think cities/states should be using local resources to perform the job of immigration agents (ICE raids, etc). Also, living in the agriculture capital of America, I see the value of your basic immigrant working illegally. I'd like to see a path to citizenship for those people. There's a lot of gray area I guess... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites