Should the "public officials" behind "sanctuary cities" be arrested for 8 USC 1324 violations? - Discussion
8 U.S. Code § 1324 - Bringing in and harboring certain aliens
(iii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation;
(iv) encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law; or
(v)
(I) engages in any conspiracy to commit any of the preceding acts, or
(II) aids or abets the commission of any of the preceding acts,
As I read through the law, I see no exemption for pompous do-gooders. I also see no exemption for holier-than-thou ignoramuses. Nor do I see any exemption for public officials.
The oath of office
All public officials swear an oath, let's look at a couple of local examples.
Texas
IN THE NAME AND BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, I, ____ , do solemnly swear (or affirm), that I will faithfully execute the duties of the office of the State of Texas, and will to the best of my ability preserve, protect, and
defend the Constitution and laws of the United States and of this State, so help me God
New York
I solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of New York, (and the Charter of the City of New York, e.g.), and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of (mayor of the City of New York, e.g.) to the best of my ability.
That's funny...both examples have defend or support Constitution of the United States as part of the oath. Neither oath says I will subvert the laws for the benefit of my own political party...in fact, both oaths stress the faithful obligations of the office.
the Constitution
The Constitution lists the provision of the common defense as one of the primary duties of the Constitution, Founder James Madison noted it as THE number one priority.
Police officers also swear this oath.
It is up to the sworn officer on the line to ensure that the oaths of all public officials are adhered to, elected official or not. Although every jurisdiction has different laws regarding nonfeasance, malfeasance, and misfeasance, in most jurisdictions these are arrestable offenses.
And in ANY case, the violation of 8 USC 1324 is a crime on it's own. Malfeasance charges should be secondary where appropriate
Yes and ASAP!
Manually curated by
@informationwar
An interesting question I would like answered is are self funded prosecutions still available to people with the money to pay a lawyer? (by country)
wow, now that I had never heard of!
I may look into that in the next coupla days!
Back in the day in england it was the only way, not sure if its still possible.
doesn't sound "right" in terms of American justice; my master is in Criminal Justice, and I haven't run across it yet (which dont mean much - despite my pretensions I still dont know everything LOL
Well, a person cannot bring a criminal law suite. They can bring a civil law suite.
So, if that person, or a group of people, can prove damages, the court would make them pay.
It is a person's duty to resist bad laws. But, is laws against illegal aliens a bad law? We have no doubt, today, that harboring slaves was a good thing...
However, these govern-cement officials are doing something that T.P.T.Shouldn'tB. want them to do. Whether they are being coerced, guided, bribed or extorted, they are following the game plan. These sanctuary cities are being set up in places to control elections and give a necessary scape goat for future bad things.
So, these officials will never be prosecuted. Of course, the break down of society by this blatant disregard of law is also something T.P.T.Shouldn'tB. desire.
thats part of the problem
putting aside the moral question of immigration (FWIW, immigration of low skill labor is a bad thing while we have so many people on welfare), the fact is that the law should be changed to what is right...if indeed it is wrong.
for public officials to subvert the law on the books in other than legal ways is flat out wrong.
if they aren't willing to follow the laws protecting me, why should I follow any laws protecting them?
A country without borders is not a country.
Further, a country doesn't even need to have any land.
As told by David Williams, who is the Prime Minister of his own country which is recognized by The US and others.
US Citizens have no rights, with Prime Minister David Williams
I am unsure of this statement.
The Vietnamese see themselves as one people, but they are divided by a border.
It isn't the border that defines them.
There are many such groups that share a common heritage and history which have nothing to do with the lines currently drawn.
The border defines who's tax cattle you are.
It is usually a meaningless line on a map.
Take the border between Alaska and Canada, without a GPS there would be no way to tell where that line was at all. And even if they actually carved a line there, it wouldn't make any difference to anyone walking out there.
exactly
Now it's my turn to be out of voting power..... Thank you for your informative posts! I will be back to upvote and comment here tomorrow! Have a beautiful weekend!
you too!
thanks for reading and your comments!
Yes they should be arrested.
agreed