Whose Country Is This Anyway

[HARDCORE]

11-27-2018

The game is apparently afoot along the international border with a few of our neighbors to the south? And call it what you like – “An Invasion Is Still An Invasion!”

In short, no one has the right or the license to barge right into your home uninvited and attempt to take over any part of it! And no where upon this earth (outside of here and now) could they, no matter who they are, ever get away with this invasion, and an attempted invasion is exactly what it is, in my opinion!

Once again – this is either our country, or it is not!! And attempting to bite the hand that has often fed you is crass, despicable, illegal, and by any stretch of the word and its usage, it is totally unacceptable within this - “Our United States of America!”

-Purchased with the Blood, Sweat, Tears and Toil
Of over 242 years of Genuine American Patriots!-

“Whose Country Is This Anyway?”

Hardcore

[Boats]

HC - my thoughts on this - is that each Central & South American Country - has a US Counsel it's here that they should apply in their country - prior to making a run for the US Border.
-
I agree there is a lot of terrorism in many of these 3rd world countries. I regret to see anyone unjustly persecuted. But laws are the laws in each country. I'm sure each country has their own set of (rules) which would include applications for work or immigration into other lands.
-
We understand that many of the folks have been treated badly or unjustly at times. I also agree that they have bad folks in their crowds as well. We (the US) just can't have a swinging gate and allow anyone to just walk in.
-
Watching Mother's with babies and small kids getting gassed isn't easy to watch. I also agree with Trump that in the crowd there are some of the bad guys who want to get in for reasons of which - we want to contain or deny entry.
-
Our borders are just that - you "can not" just freely walk in - or cross a countries boundary line without approval & justification of your purpose for coming.
-
I'm pass-ported and each country I've been to - requires documented paper's - photo's and proof of my purpose for coming into that country. In every country I go to I'm required to carry documents that state my approval and purpose for coming into that country. Date of entry - where I will be staying and my tentative departure date.
-
Lot's of paperwork. Many times I also had to have shot's prior to entering that country and have my shot card with my passport at each entry & departure.
-
No country has an open door where you just walk across the line or thru a gate without some documentation and reason for coming. This has to be clearly stated for each individual including the children - whomever comes into another's land.

Boats

[reconeil]

Being quite factual that SO MANY of America's enemies are: "Sworn to Allah" to DECEIVE & KILL as many Americans, Jews, and many other type Infidel (non-believer of Islam) nationals AS IS PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE,...these days with worldwide travel being so-damn-easy, such makes our pretty-much porous Tex/Mex border Downright Criminal, or actually a joke of Homeland Security.

Build The Wall or even a moat with alligators if need be on the border.
But, let's do something sensible for-a-change on that American & Mexican border.

Islamic Terrorists quite patiently and usually bide their time, as proven by their previous (7) Jihads or 100 Year Holy Wars.

Still, don't count on Islamic Terrorists of this currently Eighth Jihad, already having easily infiltrated into America with our longtime: "Illegal Alien Invasion", being just as patient as their predecessors were way-back-when.

I surely hope I'm Totally Wrong.

Neil

[Boats]

Can you imagine how many bypass the borders and enter illegally? Odd's are good that many are already in the US are illegal. According to the best estimates as of 2018 ~10.7 million illegal immigrants are currently in this country.

Boats

[Boats]

Undocumented Immigrants, Sanctuary Jurisdictions, and the Law
By: Lisa Weissman-Ward Q&A with Sharon Driscoll
RE: https://law.stanford.edu/2018/03/09/...sdictions-law/

Tension between the federal government and so called “sanctuary” cities, counties, and states has been rising, with President Trump threatening to withhold millions of dollars in federal funding for law enforcement programs to those states. No place is this tension more apparent than in California. In March, Attorney General Sessions put pressure on the state when he filed a lawsuit charging that California has violated the Constitution with laws that adversely impact the work of federal immigration officers—a charge that California Governor Brown and AG Becerra refute. At the same time, U. S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE) enforcement is on the rise, with the number of arrests in 2017 reportedly up by 40 percent from the year before. Here, Lisa Weissman-Ward, clinical supervising attorney and lecturer in law with the Immigrants’ Rights Clinic at Stanford Law School, explains the legal challenges facing sanctuary states and cities—and undocumented residents living here.

First, can you give us a sense of the number of people affected by this? About how many undocumented immigrants live in the Bay Area?

We don’t have exact data on the number of undocumented individuals. Of the estimated 11 million undocumented individuals in the United States, approximately 7 million are living in mixed-status families, with authorized immigrants and undocumented members. So, it’s hard to estimate. The latest data from a 2010-2014 report tell us that there is a high percentage of mixed status families in the Bay Area. Here are some examples: 30% of residents in Alameda County are immigrant and/or undocumented, 23% in Contra Costa county, 20% Sacramento county, 34% San Francisco city and county, and 37% in Santa Clara county.

There have been some well-publicized enforcement actions and raids by ICE agents in California recently. Has there been an increase since the Trump administration?

Nationwide we’ve seen a 40% increase in ICE enforcement and arrests from 2016 to 2017 and a 150% increase in arrests of undocumented immigrants without any criminal record or charges.

But we are not seeing an increase in the number of raids—the big roundups done at one’s place of work, for example. There is a real fear and panic that comes from the word raid, and so we are mindful in the terminology we use. What we are seeing is more targeted enforcement actions, which means an increase in activity where ICE is going out and looking for a specific individual by name and address. That number is definitely going up. In September, there were 500 arrests nationally as part of what ICE called “operation safe city,” which was a coordinated national ICE action. Of those 500, 33% happened in California. We just had another series of arrests that made the headlines, in particular because the Oakland Mayor alerted the county’s residents to the threat of a forthcoming immigration action. We’ve heard about 150 people were arrested in the Bay Area.

While there has been an increase in immigration enforcement actions, we are also seeing incredible local and regional advocacy and organizing to educate our communities about their legal rights and to provide critical legal and non-legal resources in the event that community members are arrested. For example, there are over a dozen local networks that provide 24/7 hotline coverage for community members to call when there is an enforcement action. These hotlines range in the scope of services they provide, but many include the dispatch of verification teams, legal observers and family accompaniment teams. Others, like the networks in Santa Clara County, San Mateo County, San Francisco City/County, and Alameda County include guaranteed access to emergency legal responders—immigration lawyers who are trained to respond to an emergent situation that involves the arrest of a community member. There is also a regional network (the Northern California Rapid Response and Immigrant Defense Network) that is working to provide coverage from Bakersfield to the Oregon/California Border (which is the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Immigration Court). The regional network is working in partnership with the various local networks to identify and fill gaps in need and coverage.

What happens to people when they are the subject of an ICE arrest? And are they offered—or entitled to—legal services?

These often occur in the dark, very early in the morning before the sunrise. So people may be sleeping when they hear a loud bang at the door. ICE agents are often dressed in “SWAT team” gear, including batons and weapons. Their jackets may even say “police,” which can be misleading. If the residents don’t have evidence that they are living in the U.S. with permission from the government and if they admit such facts, they are often removed on the spot in handcuffs and brought to an ICE processing center. There are often collateral arrests too. If ICE agents are looking for one person, they may ask for everyone’s documents in the home or office, even those not on their ICE list. So, people can get swept up.

Do ICE agents need a judicial warrant to enter a home?

Yes. An administrative ICE “warrant” is not sufficient to gain entry into a home in the absence of consent. As such, part of the education and outreach to impacted community members has been focused on advising individuals to not answer the door unless ICE has a judicial warrant—meaning a warrant signed by a judge. An Immigrants’ Rights Clinic (IRC) project that students worked on a number of years ago with the Immigrant Legal Resource Center (a national nonprofit with headquarters here in the Bay Area) involved creating a “red card” that explains individual rights and asks about a judicial warrant. IRC students came up with the idea of the red card after brainstorming with each other and consulting with impacted community members about how to make sure the information was accessible and also how community members would feel asserting their rights—so how they could be comfortable actually using the cards. The red card came from the idea of a referee on a soccer field raising a red card (to expel a player from the game). Community members can slide the card under the door to avoid engaging in any face-to-face contact. The card has been hugely successful, with millions distributed throughout California. Armed with a red card, the targeted resident does not have to open the door to ICE – but can slide the red card under the door instead.

Are students in the Immigrants’ Rights Clinic working on issues relating to increased immigration enforcement?

Yes. In a number of ways. The IRC and its students have served as the “on call” emergency attorney responders for San Mateo and Santa Clara counties. These “on call” shifts last one week at a time and are 24/7. The IRC is also participating in the Santa Clara and San Francisco sanctuary city litigation. The IRC and its students have written two amicus briefs in support of the counties. The briefs have been filed with the Northern District of California and the Ninth Circuit. The IRC is also focused on issues relating to access to counsel in a variety of settings to ensure that if an individual is arrested and detained, they have the ability to locate and communicate with counsel.

I have been on the steering committee for the Northern California Rapid Response and Immigrant Defense Network since the network got started in 2017. I participated in strategizing and fundraising efforts to get the network off the ground and have worked to serve as a liaison between the regional network and the Santa Clara and San Mateo networks. During the summer, I also served as the on-call emergency response attorney for both local networks.

Can you remind us what it means to be a “sanctuary” state like California or city like Oakland or San Francisco?

The term sanctuary has no uniform legal meaning, but in general it refers to integrationist policies—that is, policies that serve to integrate immigrants regardless of their status. So called “sanctuary” laws might include prohibition of use of county funds to initiate an inquiry or enforcement based solely on immigration status, or the refusal to hold ICE detainees (in county jails, for instance, until ICE arrives), or the refusal to let ICE agents into public spaces without a judicial warrant. So, it can take many forms. But it is not a protective blanket that prevents ICE from doing its work. They can do their job, but it’s a matter of how much assistance they get from localities.

What about the administration’s threat to withhold federal funding from states?

What we saw with the executive orders the week after President Trump’s inauguration included direct or indirect threats to penalize cities, counties, and states that do not work closely with ICE. In Jan. 2017 an executive order threatened to strip “sanctuary” jurisdictions of funds. This is now being litigated. There was also a call to reinstate what is called the “secure communities” program, a program that President Obama ended because of litigation and concern around a number of issues, including racial profiling. The border security executive order explicitly states that the administration wants to expand local law enforcement cooperation with and participation in ICE enforcement. This includes programs to deputize local police to act as ICE agents. But here in CA we’ve seen legislative action to counter these proposals. Just this week we saw another attack against California for its commitment to its immigrant communities. This came in the form of the lawsuit filed by Trump against the State of California. This case is as much political as it is legal.

About the writer: Lisa Weissman-Ward is a Lecturer in Law and supervising attorney with the Stanford Law School Immigrants’ Rights Clinic. Lisa supervises clinical law students in their representation of clients facing removal from the United States.