LAPD Chief Tells Officers to Ignore Federal Illegal Immigrant Law
In Los Angeles, where the distinctions between the citizen and the non-citizen are often little more than abstractions, they are one step closer to vanishing altogether.
That such a thing should occur in Los Angeles comes as no surprise to anyone paying even the slightest attention to recent trends in the city’s governance. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa is famously sympathetic to the cause of illegal immigrants, and most members of the city council hold similar views. So if the latest assault on the rule of law as it pertains to illegal immigrants in L.A. had sprung from the mind of this or that empty-headed liberal politician, it would scarcely be worth notice other than as cause for regret among the declining number of residents who find such things objectionable.
But this time it’s different. The latest affront to American citizenship and the rule of law comes from Charlie Beck, chief of the Los Angeles Police Department, who now advocates that officers in his department ignore federal law by declining to honor requests from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials that some illegal immigrants in LAPD custody be detained for deportation proceedings.
If Beck has his way, illegal immigrants arrested by LAPD officers for crimes the chief considers “petty” will not be held for ICE officers, even if the arrested person is already marked for deportation. This comes only months after the LAPD, at Beck’s urging, altered long-standing policy by making it easier for illegal immigrants — who cannot be issued driver’s licenses in California — to avoid having their cars impounded after being stopped for a traffic violation.
Beck justified this latest proposal by saying that the federal government’s policy of deporting illegal immigrants after arrests for minor crimes has “eroded public trust” in a city where, by Beck’s account, 750,000 illegal immigrants reside. (In 2010, I attended a meeting where Beck put the figure at 600,000. How much more accommodating will he be when the number tops one million? And with the police chief rolling out the welcome mat to anyone with the will and the means to come over the border and settle in L.A., why won’t it?)
The Los Angeles Times characterized the chief’s motives thus:
Beck portrayed the move as necessary to counter federal laws that require local police to share information with federal immigration officials about arrests. (Emphasis added)
Consider: the chief of police in America’s second-largest city has come to the opinion that certain federal laws are inconvenient for a large number of people living illegally in his city, and that therefore his department must enact policies that “counter federal laws.”
The above is a fine example of the way the left treats states rights. They’re all for it but, but only when they can use it as a tool to ratchet things in their direction. States are freely encouraged to enact more liberal policies, and prevented whenever possible from enacting more conservative ones.
Since the democrats favor open borders with unlimited illegal immigration they’ll viciously attack any state or local government that makes any attempt to reduce it, claiming federal supremacy on the issue, while conveniently ignoring any state that makes it easier or encourages it, even to the point of blatantly violating federal law. Since the ultimate goal is to get all these people voting (D), does anybody really think that this administration would even look into a state that made it easier, or even outright allowed, for illegal aliens to vote?
The same thing happened on healthcare. No state can be exempt from the mandates of Obamacare, but any state that wants to go further left, like implementing a state single-payer system, is not only allowed but encouraged to do so with federal subsidies. They had the audacity to herald this feature as an example of “states rights” when they were ramming it through. No doubt any state that goes this route will be endlessly bailed out and subsidized by the federal government, because they can’t allow their ideology to rightly collapse under it’s own weight and warn the rest of the nation.
Conservatives tend to actually believe in states rights as a concept and would be perfectly content to let CA, VT, and others have a full single payer system and other liberal goodies as long as they didn’t have to pay for it and were allowed their own systems. Liberals on the other hand see states rights only as a tool and weapon to use to advance their agenda gradually over a nationwide scale. Remember the Berlin wall was built to keep people in, not out. There can be no escape for the productive from the worker’s paradise or else it will fail, and they know this.
“Since the ultimate goal is to get all these people voting (D), does anybody really think that this administration would even look into a state that made it easier, or even outright allowed, for illegal aliens to vote?”
My reading of the Constitution is that a state could, if it chose to, let illegal aliens (or non-residents or six-year-olds or anyone else, for that matter) vote — even for Presidential electors. Some states currently let foreigners vote in local elections. States in the past have allowed foreigners to vote. Don’t see why those practices couldn’t be extended to illegal aliens, too.
“Since the ultimate goal is to get all these people voting (D), does anybody really think that this administration would even look into a state that made it easier, or even outright allowed, for illegal aliens to vote?”
My reading of the Constitution is that it’s a state’s right, if it chooses to, to let illegal aliens (or non-residents or six-year-olds or anyone else, for that matter) vote — even for Presidential electors. Some states currently let foreigners vote in local elections. States in the past have allowed foreigners to vote. Don’t see why those practices couldn’t be extended to illegal aliens, too.
In addition, it seems to me that a federal law intended to prevent a state from doing that would be unconstitutional.
You just don’t get it, do you, Mr. Dunphy? Arizona policy bad; Los Angeles policy good. Show some humanity for a change.
My daughter was rear ended by an illegal who didn’t have insurance. He’s didn’t pay and is still driving. Where’s the justice? This is the criminal system that liberals want. This is the criminal system we have.
These idiots won’t be happy till they have turned our country into a third world dung heap.
So Obama is not the only one ignoring Federal Law! Now the LA Chief of Police wants to act like the president as well? Perhaps Romney’s AG can have a sit down with the Chief in January and explain what swearing an Oath to defend the Laws of the USA and the Constitution as well as the Laws of the State of California really means.
Enforce all laws even the ones you don’t agree with. It is not that hard, if you cannot handle that I am sure there is someone in LA qualified to be Chief, because apparently he is not! How can a cheif tell others who have sworn to enforce all Laws equally and fairly with a Moron Like Obama president and this goofball Chief.
Talk is cheap. Threatening to cut off all federal aid to LaLaLand (and all other “sanctuary” cities) would be an instant attention-getter.
That would include disaster aid. “If the Big Earthquake hits during my administration, Mr. Beck, you will be on your own. Have the illegals do the cleaning up.”
Well written. If any state, city or county does not comply with Federal Laws such as immigration snd military recruiting, simply withdraw all Federal funding including education for that government. To not deport illegals upon leaving prison or jail is outrageously idiotic and treasonous.
Let the Mexican government support LA and San Fransciso.
This isn’t “blurring” the line between citizen and non-citizen — it’s putting the non-citizen ahead of the citizen. If federal law enforcement requested LA police hold onto a citizen wanted for some reason, would they let them go? Of course not — but they would release the more privileged illegal.
I recently was on phone standby for jury duty and reached a conclusion- I can no longer be impartial based on the descent into lawlessness of the various CA jurisdictions. So many sanctuary cities, so many laws that aren’t enforced.
How can I vote to convict someone of breaking a law when the state itself is capricious in which laws it enforces and upholds? Why am I supposed to hold this person to this law when the state/county/city has gone on record that they’re willfully ignoring whole classes of people violating other laws?
So, is Beck getting ready to run for sheriff? I thought the Gov. just signed off on CDLs for illegal immigrants? (Why keep vehicle code violators in custody if they can now get a license to drive?) Does this have anything to do with realignment? You know? Emptying the state prisons per the ninth circuit court order to get the prison count down and sending the convicts back to the local jails for better health care? One either has to release those low level local criminals to make room for the convicts, put them on electronic monitoring and house arrest, or build more jails. Does LAPD pay for inmate sex change operations?
I rather suspect that it would “erode public trust” more to have the Police Department picking and choosing which laws to enforce. So what happens when some perp is arrested on a weapons charge or for murder and says that he chose not to obey that particular law, JUST LIKE CHIEF BECK? Gahh, it beggars the imagination.
Published on Jul 30, 2012 by liarpoliticians The US government thinks that it will recruit computer hackers to prop up a corrupt government.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bGRuBTC9HE
Maybe if we can just get California to offer up enough “sanctuary” and benefits we can get all the illegals to go there (at least all the ones looking for a handout), then we can give it back to Mexico. We’d solve most of our immigration problem and be rid of a big blue nest of sedition all in one. What’s not to like?
This is how Rome fell, they allowed the other tribes to intermingle among the Romans and became dependent on them after some years passed.
It is a sign of an overstretched system and lazy minds. Eventually the tribes revolted at being treated as second class citizens and after a series of battles the Roman Empire collapsed. Sound familiar?
We can let the barbarians fight our wars and do our menial labor. If they are honored veterans, we’ll give them farms on the edges of the Empire. We Romans never had it so good…
What could possibly go wrong?
Here we have the chief of police choosing lawlessness over law enforcement in order to “build public trust.”
With police chiefs like this, who needs criminals?
Officer Dunphy,
It’s time. Hang it up, pull the pin, retire.
You’re fighting a losing battle.
The happiest day of my life was when I put away the Sam Brown belt for the last time after 24 years.
I know you are a “regular guy”, and we retired regular guys will welcome you with open arms.
“Regular Guy” is one of your best essays in my view. It’s just as true today as it was on Aug 03, 2004.
Regular guys are defined here
http://old.nationalreview.com/dunphy/dunphy200408030841.asp
“In Los Angeles, where the distinctions between the citizen and the non-citizen are often little more than abstractions, they are one step closer to vanishing altogether.” —
That situation is not only found in LA. Fourth-grade Social Studies textbooks in Kentucky define citizens as ” people who live together in a community “, and other statements made in the same vein. Not once does it mention: your legal status from being born in a country, your parents, or the naturalization process etc. All you have to do is live in a country, and you are a citizen. If schools are legitimizing this idea, no wonder the illegal immigrant community along with everyone else is going to think its OK for them to vote.
“Illegal immigrant” = TRESPASSER. (What part of “illegal” don’t these ‘legislators’ understand?)!
I’m ready to declare war on Mexico abd MAKE them take California back.
Borders, language, culture. Blood and soil. They matter.
My police career was ended when I was on duty and struck by an unlicensed illegal alien. He shouldn’t have even been in this country yet he was here and he was driving. He almost killed me and took my career from me. Only 5 surgeries so far. two more pending. Thanks Chief beck.
People forget that law enforcement heads, though duty bound to uphold the law, often eschew the law in favor of their political biases.
In fact, the BIGGEST lawbreaker of all is the chief law enforcement officer in the US- AG Holder. Moreover, when the fish stinks from the head up – via the Radical-in-Chief and his surrogates – all manner of prejudices creep to the fore, knowing full well they will not be fired, nor punished for their dereliction of duty!
2012/08/01/will-barack-hussein-obamas-lawless-justice-department-under-the-aegis-of-ag-holder-finally-fall-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/
this video too – 2012/08/22/the-results-of-washingtons-dictator-in-chief-via-short-video-clip-adina-kutnicki/
LA is a test case…once it falls, so too will the rest….and they know it!