Nolan writes:
“Activist Dolores Huertaclaims that California needs to enact the California Values Act, Senate Bill 54 (SB 54), as a counterweight to Texas’s draconian law banning sanctuary cities in that state and President Donald Trump’s “xenophobic agenda to deport millions of people.”
I disagree. While I can understand why Huerta dislikes Texas’s sanctuary city law, it is an exaggeration to call it “draconian.” And Trump is just enforcing immigration provisions that were written by Congress and signed into law by previous presidents. If those laws are xenophobic, the solution is to lobby Congress to change them.
Making California a sanctuary state will not stop Trump’s enforcement efforts. But it would violate federal law and make California ineligible for certain types of federal grants.
. . . .
Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel found a better way to help. He established a Legal Protection Fund for undocumented aliens living in Chicago.
Once undocumented aliens are in expedited removal proceedings, they are subject to mandatory detention and cannot be represented by an attorney; but they can be helped by attorneys before they are in such proceedings.
When appropriate, attorneys can assist them in putting together the evidence they will need to establish that they have been in the United States for more than two years, or that they have a credible fear of persecution, if they find themselves in expedited removal proceedings.
This would help many undocumented aliens without violating any federal law or making California ineligible for needed federal funds.
Emanuel found a better way to help. He established a Legal Protection Fund for undocumented aliens living in Chicago.
Once undocumented aliens are in expedited removal proceedings, they are subject to mandatory detention and cannot be represented by an attorney; but they can be helped by attorneys before they are in such proceedings.
When appropriate, attorneys can assist them in putting together the evidence they will need to establish that they have been in the United States for more than two years, or that they have a credible fear of persecution, if they find themselves in expedited removal proceedings.
This would help many undocumented aliens without violating any federal law or making California ineligible for needed federal funds.”
**************************************************
Go over to The Hill at the link for Nolan’s complete article.
PWS
07-15-17
Related
Related posts:
- THE HILL: N. RAPPAPORT SAYS THAT EXPEDITED REMOVAL IS THE ANSWER TO IMMIGRATION COURT BACKLOGS – I DISAGREE!
- THE HILL: NOLAN HAS SOME IDEAS ON HOW TO DEAL WITH FAMILIES AT THE BORDER!
- THE HILL: N. Rappaport Believes That Expedited Removal Is the Key To Reducing The Immigration Court Backlog
- NO EXPERTISE NECESSARY! – At The “New EOIR,” Immigration Judges No Longer Need to Demonstrate Immigration Experience – Just a Willingness To Send Migrants to Potential Death, Danger, or Misery Without Due Process or Fundamental Fairness – When Your Job Is To Impose Arbitrary “Death Sentences,” Maybe It’s Easier If You Don’t Understand What You’re Really Doing!