General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBREAKING: Federal judge blocks enforcement of Texas sanctuary cities law
Opponents call the measure, which sailed through the Republican-controlled Legislature, a show your papers law. They sued, and the ruling by U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia in San Antonio keeps it from taking effect Friday, allowing the case time to proceed.
Conservatives say the crackdown on illegal immigration enforces the rule of law.
Under the law, Texas could fine police and counties that dont honor federal requests to hold people jailed on nonimmigration offenses longer for possible deportation. It also ensures that police chiefs and sheriffs could face removal from office and criminal charges for not complying with federal detainer requests.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/aug/30/judge-blocks-enforcement-texas-sanctuary-cities-la/?utm_source=onesignal&utm_campaign=pushnotify&utm_medium=push
herding cats
(19,564 posts)Especially right now!
orleans
(34,049 posts)read the updated article at link or look at my post downthread
HubbleSN
(17 posts)USALiberal
(10,877 posts)Gothmog
(145,129 posts)Gothmog
(145,129 posts)Judge Garcia is on of the judges on the three judge panel in the Texas redistricting case
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)orleans
(34,049 posts)"But the judge left in place the new state law allowing police to determine the legal status of those they encounter during their duties.
"The ruling is a substantial, though not complete, victory for sanctuary city defenders."
snip
"For rank-and-file illegal immigrants, however, the judges decision to what critics call the show-your-papers law to go into effect is a major blow.
"Under the new law, police officers will be permitted though not required to inquire as to the immigration status of anyone they encounter. Judge Garcia said as long as the immigration check doesnt prolong a stop, it wouldnt be unconstitutional."
the article was updated after the original op was posted
Brother Buzz
(36,416 posts)TomSlick
(11,097 posts)I'd like to read the constitutional rationale.