I wonder if all the groups are familiar with 8 U.S. Code 1324?
(Washington Times) Immigrant-rights groups released a new video Monday coaching illegal immigrants on their constitutional rights and how to avoid run-ins with federal deportation agents, as advocates gear up to try to thwart as many deportations as possible.
The video is part of a growing infrastructure designed to protect illegal immigrants from legal consequences under President Trump, and gives instructions on handling everything from encounters on the streets to when agents show up at a home with a deportation warrant.
“If they come here, to the house, don’t open the doors. ‘No abran las puertas,’†the advocates say in a 7-minute training video, released by a coalition that’s dubbed itself Informed Immigrant.
The video is aimed at children, who are encouraged to get their families to plan for potential encounters with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers and agents.
Already, officers say they’re seeing far fewer people willing to open doors to them in recent months as warnings take hold.
This is a violation of (A)(1)(a)(iv) and (v). But, really, few are ever charged with the statute. It’s usually those who smuggle illegals over the border. That said, as I’ve noted many times, it would be worthwhile for ICE to get warrants. Have a bunch of judges across the country, perhaps some retired ones who want a little something to do, who will authorize arrest/detain warrants for those who are unlawfully present in the U.S.
Of course, these are the types of people the activist groups are helping
- Illegal Immigrant Driver Intentionally Killed Bicyclist, Police Say
- Illegal Immigrant Accused of Killing Elderly Man
Fortunately, we have grounded people working in the Senate
https://twitter.com/WilliamTeach/status/856680373971017731
https://twitter.com/WilliamTeach/status/856680494523703296
Yeah, it is a crime to be unlawfully present in the United States. Illegally coming to the U.S. is actually a crime, for which “for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.” Overstaying visas has similar penalties.
TEACH:
You may inadvertently be conflating illegal entry with unlawful presence.
Do you really believe it’s a criminal act to advise a child that they can legally refuse to open their doors to strangers claiming to be part of trump’s Deportation Force?
Finally, why does this issue, i.e., unlawful presence of Hispanics, appear to be so important to the far right?
Good to see the little guy finally acknowledges the illegal aliens amongst us lawful folks.
Who knew?
Did you ever get a speeding ticket, Jeff? That’s a crime, which usually results in a civil penalty. Those in the country unlawfully are breaking the law.
Why are you profiling, Jeff? Do you assume that all illegals are Hispanic? For shame!
Arizona v. United States: “As a general rule, it is not a crime for a removable alien to remain in the United States.”
Just skip that “As a general rule, it is not a crime…” part and conflate it to mean “it’s really okay”.
Such tools.
Are they here illegally? Then it is a crime, which usually results in a civil penalty and deportation. Furthermore, the point of the post is not the illegals, but those supporting the illegals.
William Teach: Are they here illegally? Then it is a crime
We cited the federal court, which noted that unlawful presence is not generally a crime. Republicans in Congress had proposed legislation criminalizing unlawful presence, the Strengthen and Fortify Enforcement Act in 2013, but they were unsuccessful in their efforts.
We offered no value judgment. We did show that the claim “it is a crime to be unlawfully present in the United States” is false.
Yikes!
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/25/us/judge-blocks-trump-sanctuary-cities.html?_r=0
Maybe Jefferson Beauregard Sessions needs to brush up on the US Constitution.
Maybe Obama’s judge should:https://twitter.com/nia4_trump/status/857012469742678016
Jl: Maybe Obama’s judge should
The Constitution has priority over statute. Under the anti-commandeering doctrine of the Tenth Amendment, states cannot be compelled to enforce federal law, though neither can they interfere with federal agents.
So it is ok to resume segregated schools and the government can not with old Fed funds.
The Constitution has priority over statute. The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law. State laws to the contrary are unconstitutional.
But the 13th, 14th and 15th were passed in an illegal manner, so we can ignore them.
Where were you when Obama was going to withhold federal funds from states whose schools refused to allow boys to shower with girls? Where you spouting this same crap then or was it OK because it was Obama?
You are diverting from the discussion as to whether unlawful presence is a crime. We cited the federal courts.
As for the 14th Amendment, 3/4 of the states had ratified the amendment in 1868. A hundred fifty years of jurisprudence confirm that equal protection under the 14th Amendment is the law of the land.
You are diverting from the discussion as to whether unlawful presence is a crime. We cited the federal courts.
As for transgender rights, the 14th Amendment explicitly grants Congress the power to enforce equal protection under Title IX, which was the basis for the transgender policy. The states had every right to argue their case against the Obama policy in federal court, where they found injunctive relief. The court found that Title IX was meant only to apply to birth sex.