When will the politicians who support open borders be held accountable for their policies? Kate Steinle would still be alive today if it wasn't for San Francisco's sanctuary city policy. h/t @michellemalkin @seanhannitypic.twitter.com/nJFKnTfJtw
-
-
Different types of warrants. ICE's are authorized internally (no judge). SF said in 2014 it would require a judicial determination of probable cause.
-
http://codes.findlaw.com/us/title-8-aliens-and-nationality/8-usc-sect-1373.html … Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal, State, or local law, a Federal, State, or local government entity or official may not prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration
-
Leaving aside possible Printz issue, detainers aren't information sharing. They're a request to hold someone in jail. But some fed courts have held that they are insufficient as an independent basis to detain someone under the 4th Am.
-
Again the question is do localities or even states have the right to withhold information based on immigration status? If ICE is not being informed that a person has illegal status is that not withholding information?
-
That's a separate question from detainers, which aren't requests for information. Also, it's typically DHS that determines a person's status. Broader question is whether feds can force locals to enforce fed law with which they disagree. That's Printz.
-
I guess I missed that local law is superior to federal law. Or that labeling it as "Detainers" means that certain requests should be ignored. I guess this is an issue for the Supreme Court to decide if those Federal Courts have it right.
-
Courts' issue with detainers is that they lack an independent determination of probable cause. More akin to a cop saying "please lock this guy up for me." On state/federal balanze, start with Printz: https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/95-1478.ZO.html …
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The sheriff had said afterward (July 2015) that the jail would hold someone only with a judicial warrant.
-
The lack of a warrant is a problem. Currently, immigration law is an administrative action, right? Immigration judges aren't Art 3 judges and their power is limited in scope, like any court of limited jurisdiction. Some changes in current law are necessary to fix this problem.

-
ICE can and does obtain warrants from Article III judges. It's civil warrants don't even go through an ALJ.
-
it's the cases with no warrant that are causing an issue. Can ALJ even issue a warrant, other than in connection with a removal order? I believe this is an area of current law that needs to be fixed, not my field of expertise however. Maybe immigration lawyers could add thoughts.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
So they changed are you happy?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.