5 ms·

> It’s not the city or states job to enforce federal immigration laws. This has never been claimed nor intimated in this entire thread. I can tell you're havi

> It’s not the city or states job to enforce federal immigration laws. This has never been claimed nor intimated in this entire thread. I can tell you're having a difficult time understanding what I'm saying. Let me rephrase it for you: - If the policy of the Democratic Party is that immigration laws should be enforced - Why does the party tolerate Democratic sanctuary cities? - Why does the Democratic party source presidential candidates who have in practice (not simply in word) opposed the immigration law enforcement policy?

raw_anon_1111 6mo ago
> Let's not enforce any immigration law, and subsidize those here illegally And then sanctuary cities was mentioned. Whether they supported or opposed anything on the state level is completely irrelevant - it’s not there job Once you brought up sanctuary cities - you are making a completely irrelevant argument.
- youarentrightjr 6mo ago
  [flagged]
  - raw_anon_1111 6mo ago
    Again your argument is irrelevant. The Supreme Court has just as often struck down gun laws where a city couldn’t do anything about it. Your question isn’t in good faith. Desantis also tried to do something about immigration and the Supreme Court said he couldn’t do it . What part of immigration is not the purvue of state government is hard to understand? Oh and Obama deported more people than Trump..
    - youarentrightjr 6mo ago
      [flagged]
    - youarentrightjr 6mo ago
      Flagging my comments doesn't make you right by the way. > The Supreme Court has just as often struck down gun laws where a city couldn’t do anything about it. You're exposing your ignorance by showing you don't know what "sanctuary city" means. Sanctuary cities aren't contrasted with non-sanctuary cities where a sanctuary city's police officers don't arrest people for immigration offenses. The contrast is because the city impedes federal investigations into immigration matters. It's patently false to say that cities "can't do anything" about gun violations. There are plenty of examples of cities not impeding, or even assisting, the ATF in these scenarios.
      - Schiendelman 6mo ago
        It's been pointed out to you repeatedly that city police officers don't arrest people for immigration violations. That's not their job. It was never their job.
        youarentrightjr 6mo ago
        Oh, thanks Ben. It's not like I said that in the parent comment: > Sanctuary cities aren't contrasted with non-sanctuary cities where a sanctuary city's police officers don't arrest people for immigration offenses. > The contrast is because the city impedes federal investigations into immigration matters. You sanctuary city defenders are real sharp. Hope you find some time this year to figure out "Your Strategy", god knows you need one.
        Schiendelman 6mo ago
        This is really inappropriate for Hacker News.
        youarentrightjr 6mo ago
        So is your piling on, not adding anything substantive to the discussions , and raw_anon_1111's repeated strawmanning of my point (the claim was never that sanctuary cities were illegal, simply that their existence is a reflection of the Democratic Party's view towards immigration laws). Yet here we are. You build the community you deserve through your words and actions. I'm more than happy to have good faith discussion, and legitimately strive to take every point in the best light as possible. That's falling out of favor here, especially for political topics. If you want to roll in the dirt don't think I'm just going to walk away.

raw_anon_1111 6mo ago

> Let's not enforce any immigration law, and subsidize those here illegally And then sanctuary cities was mentioned. Whether they supported or opposed anything on the state level is completely irrelevant - it’s not there job Once you brought up sanctuary cities - you are making a completely irrelevant argument.

youarentrightjr 6mo ago
[flagged]
- raw_anon_1111 6mo ago
  Again your argument is irrelevant. The Supreme Court has just as often struck down gun laws where a city couldn’t do anything about it. Your question isn’t in good faith. Desantis also tried to do something about immigration and the Supreme Court said he couldn’t do it . What part of immigration is not the purvue of state government is hard to understand? Oh and Obama deported more people than Trump..
  - youarentrightjr 6mo ago
    [flagged]
  - youarentrightjr 6mo ago
    Flagging my comments doesn't make you right by the way. > The Supreme Court has just as often struck down gun laws where a city couldn’t do anything about it. You're exposing your ignorance by showing you don't know what "sanctuary city" means. Sanctuary cities aren't contrasted with non-sanctuary cities where a sanctuary city's police officers don't arrest people for immigration offenses. The contrast is because the city impedes federal investigations into immigration matters. It's patently false to say that cities "can't do anything" about gun violations. There are plenty of examples of cities not impeding, or even assisting, the ATF in these scenarios.
    - Schiendelman 6mo ago
      It's been pointed out to you repeatedly that city police officers don't arrest people for immigration violations. That's not their job. It was never their job.
      - youarentrightjr 6mo ago
        Oh, thanks Ben. It's not like I said that in the parent comment: > Sanctuary cities aren't contrasted with non-sanctuary cities where a sanctuary city's police officers don't arrest people for immigration offenses. > The contrast is because the city impedes federal investigations into immigration matters. You sanctuary city defenders are real sharp. Hope you find some time this year to figure out "Your Strategy", god knows you need one.
        Schiendelman 6mo ago
        This is really inappropriate for Hacker News.
        youarentrightjr 6mo ago
        So is your piling on, not adding anything substantive to the discussions , and raw_anon_1111's repeated strawmanning of my point (the claim was never that sanctuary cities were illegal, simply that their existence is a reflection of the Democratic Party's view towards immigration laws). Yet here we are. You build the community you deserve through your words and actions. I'm more than happy to have good faith discussion, and legitimately strive to take every point in the best light as possible. That's falling out of favor here, especially for political topics. If you want to roll in the dirt don't think I'm just going to walk away.