Hey, there! Log in / Register
Cambridge could lose $14 million if Trump goes through with threat to ban money to sanctuary cities
By adamg on Tue, 11/29/2016 - 1:58pm
Cambridge Day reports city officials are resolute: They're not giving up the city's sanctuary status, and will work with neighboring Somerville (which could lose $6 million) and Boston ($250 million) to figure out ways around the loss of money.
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
OK
How much police time would the cities lose if they didn't resist the feds and devoted a large percentage of police work to being immigration officers?
There are plenty of problems to occupy the Police without requiring them to inquire as to people's immigration status.
ICE doesn't deal with local day-to-day police work so there's no reason local cops should be dealing with ICE tasks.
Ticket people who BLOCK THE
Ticket people who BLOCK THE FLIPPING BOX constantly. And run red lights. There, that's a million dollars just with that.
you forgot
double parking. Ooooh the double parking! Lots of money on the table. Here's an idea: WHY NOT just tell them you'll cooperate and then don't.
Is lying beyond the pale for politicians now? What year am I in?
If the Feds really cared about punishing towns
Like somerville and Cambridge, they can just tell towns and cities that want to be "sanctuary" cities, that they will strictly enforce immigration laws in those towns. Everytime someone gets arrested the Feds get the prints and know who they are. when they get arraigned, (and if they are illegal) they can just be at the court house to get them when they get out.
The Feds can never make towns enforce federal laws do I dont even know how this is an issue
Isn't that the problem in the first place?
Besides Cambridge most of these towns are immigrant centers, and the state / towns can't afford to be doing the feds job and staff for normal law enforcement work.
The feds have basically called for the city and state to pick up the tab and do ICEs work without offsetting funding. Many of the cities told them to go pound sand and claim to be sanctuary cities because it's also just good PR.
If the funding was there, there'd be a lot less gruff to enforcement. But it's not, and it will never be coming; because it's such a political slam dunk to keep this problem around in DC.
This, this, this. It all
This, this, this. It all boils down to the federal government telling the local enforcement offices "Do our (nasty) job for us! But we won't give you more money".
Actually most of the
Actually most of the departments take issue with being asked to enforce immigration laws because they want to have a good relationship with the immigrant communities. I live in a sanctuary city and my friends who are officers, even the very conservative ones that wish we would cut down immigration completely, tend to agree that they do not want to be responsible for deporting people. As soon as they start doing the job for ICE the residents, both legal and not so legal , will start avoiding them. Crimes go un-reported, people don't want to deal with the police, people avoid the police etc.
Beyond the gun and badge a major tool the police have is public relations. If a sizeable chunk of the population wants nothing to do with you then your job becomes much harder.
Plus, as you said, quite frankly it is not the job of city police to do the job of the feds. Although I suspect that even if grants were offered to fully pay for it most officers who planned on having long term police careers would want nothing to do with it. They already deal with enough push back from communities for the other arrests they make, they don't need community anger over deportations.
define
sanctuary city / status?
Glad to help
http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=what+is+sanctuary+city+status
You're welcome.
SO???????????
A sanctuary city is a city in the United States or Canada that has adopted a policy of protecting undocumented immigrants by not prosecuting them solely for violating federal immigration laws in the country in which they are now living illegally
thank you for the link scratchie
anyone else bothered by this
violating federal immigration laws in the country in which they are now living illegally
how are they legal if they are violating immigration law?
Federal
Yup, they're violating federal laws.
So federal agencies can deal with them.
Nobody's stopping that, just not volunteering to do their work for them, for free.
Helping ICE doesn't use any local police resources
The local police are merely asked to send fingerprints electronically to ICE who quickly determine the person's status. In sanctuary cities, they refuse to send the prints to ICE. The local police already take the fingerprints of all prisoners and share them with the State Police and FBI as part of AFIS, the Automated Fingerprint Identification System. This has solved countless crimes over the years. Even if ICE obtains the prints, the sanctuary city police refuse to hold the illegals and release them before ICE arrives. Hiding the prints from ICE for political purposes should be a crime or at least a loss of federal funds.
Fish the prints go to the Feds...
The Feds can figure out who they are easily
I said FBI..
The problem is that even if ICE gets the prints, the sanctuary city police won't hold an illegal until ICE gets there.
They have to hold them anyway
And the person has to show up for court, if ICE really wanted them, they could get them either way.
The person has to show up for court?
Pete, why and how do the police have to hold them? Most Clerk Magistrates (former pols) and the Bail Commissioners are eager to bail anyone on "personal recognizance" to collect their $40 fee. Then when the illegal doesn't show up for court, another default warrant issues and nobody goes looking for them unless they are arrested or stopped again.
How many default warrants are out there for people who "had to show up in court" but didn't? Tens of thousands of warrants in Massachusetts alone. How would ICE know to show up in court if they are not notified?
Fish
My only point was this:
A person gets arrested, booked, and printed. Those prints go to the FBI within 5-10 minutes. In this 5-10 minutes, the FBI would be alerted if the person you arrested has some sort of federal warrant, out of state warrant, or whatever else the FBI wants to keep tabs on people for. The department of homeland security (ICE included) have warrants for people in NCIC already, and they would be notified the same way the FBI would if there were arrest warrants on them and they were arrested by local police
I'd day about 95% of those arrested has some sort of bail, and probably 75% only need to come up with the $40 clerk fee. Your average bail process during non court hours takes on average about 4-8 hours if you have money, and 12 hours if you don't. If you don't get bailed you go to court by the police then next morning anyway. If you do get bailed, you at least need (or should) go to court the next day. Of course you don't have to show up, but point being, there is plenty of time for the feds to come and get you if they really wanted to.
In addition to Pete's point -
In addition to Pete's point -
If the city has to hold immigrants until ICE shows up, that is using local police resources for this and directly contradicting your first post.
Forget it, Jake
It's
ChinaFishtownRe: In addition to Pete's point
The biggest expense would be to feed them a meal or two. ICE usually arrives within a few hours. State and local usually use a cheap nearby restaurant, often McDonald's to feed the prisoners. The "Unhappy Meal" as we used to call it. On a cost benefit analysis, removing a criminal illegal, probably receiving all sorts of public benefits, is worth the price of a burger and fries or Egg McMcMuffin. ICE quickly removes them to the federal side of the Plymouth County Jail.
If they're already receiving
If they're already receiving "all sorts of public benefits" then why is ICE having such trouble finding them?
Who said they had a problem finding them?
They were never looking in the first place!
Unless they have been
Unless they have been deported before, how do the Feds know these people are here illegally just from fingerprints?
Well if they wanted to.....
Let's say John C. Davidson with a date of birth of 4/5/87 from 150 Valhalla St, Mexico City, Mexico flies into the US with a Visa that allows him to stay 2 weeks. Now John stays past his Visa 5 weeks or 5 years. ICE can make a notation next to the above information and "tag" him in the federal system. If John is arrested in Boston, MA and fingerprinted, ICE would know within minutes that John C. Davidson is in the cell block of some Boston police precinct. ICE can then come and wait for him to be bailed, wait for him at court if he isn't bailed, or not do anything.
I guess in theory (which is what this whole "sanctuary" city thing is about), ICE could tell the Boston police: "Listen, you guys receive $250 million in federal funds, that means if we ask you to hold a prisoner in your cellblock until we have enough manpower to pick up someone who is in the country illegally, you need to hold that person in your cell block until we come and get him"
That is where this whole federal money thing might get iffy. Ice has never done that in the past however, and I don't see them doing that in the future.
Of course, overstays are only
Of course, overstays are only 30-40% of people here illegally. And some overstays came prior to the fingerprint requirement. So, they can spot some people here illegally, but a negative hit isn't necessarily a sign that someone is here legally.
This isn't about criminals.
The local police already take the fingerprints of all prisoners and share them with the State Police and FBI as part of AFIS, the Automated Fingerprint Identification System
Right. What we don't do is fingerprint people who have a busted taillight, or a speeding ticket, or people who file a police report.
This isn't about letting heroin dealers skip merrily around Somerville, it's about not demanding the passport info of a Hispanic person who gets in a car accident.
Yup
Please remember that congress chose not to make it a criminal offense to be in the country illegally.
Entering without permission: illegal and criminal.
Entering legally but remaining illegally (i.e. overstaying a visa): illegal but not criminal.
Simply being here without proper documentation of permission to enter: Illegal but not criminal.
If you do something that is illegal but not criminal (e.g., overstay your visa, build in violation of the building code, etc.) the government's remedy is generally limited to making you correct the illegal situation (i.e., leave the country, correct the building code violations) You aren't charged with a crime; you are not a criminal.
Side question.
I wonder if you do one of the above "non criminal" things, but do not file federal or state taxes, are you now a criminal?
I don't have the facts at hand
But I believe that failure to file, while it carries interest and administrative penalties, is not criminal unless done with intent to defraud. I could be wrong.
"Threat to ban money to sanctuary cities"
Enforce current law enacted by a bipartisan body.
How about we
Just keep the money we pay the Feds in taxes. I left my small town because the factories were gone, sacrificed to get an education, worked hard and am doing well. Why do I need to have money taken from my paycheck because others decided to sit on their butt because they felt entitled to a well paying jobs that no longer exist with just a high school diploma?
Herp?
Derp?
Tuk
De tuk R jerbs!
The FightFor15
Blog is here:
http://www.universalhub.com/2016/arrests-made-protesters-calling-15-mini...
Or get off your duff and move
I know it's complicated, but instead of sitting around rural Maine bitching about jobs that aren't coming back, come down to Boston and learn a trade and fill the gaping hole in the local labor construction market. If there really is an upcoming labor shortage, I were the construction companies, I'd build some cheap-ish, dorm-style housing and advertise in regions semi-locally where you could come down for the week, work, and then go home for the weekend.
Would it be a lifestyle for everyone? No. But it might work for some people, and $40/hour goes a long way in Millinocket.
Come down for the week?
Where do you think half the tradesmen live now? Sure, the older guys live in Quincy and Braintree and Watertown, but a huge chunk of younger guys working a trade in Boston and Cambridge live outside of 495 and drive it every day.
For all of you upset over
For all of you upset over losing the funds, there's nothing stopping you from creating a non-profit and donating money as you see fit.
Do billionaires read UHub?
I don't know many people who have $14 million to burn for 4-8 years to cover a hole left by an asinine Federal policy designed only to punish cities for political reasons.
It's a federal issue, not local
It's been long settled that immigration is exclusively a federal issue, not local. We don't want 50 states making their own immigration laws, and we sure as hell don't want 89,000 municipalities doing that either.
I'm sure a lot of people on the 'sanctuary' side of the debate cheered when Arizona's state laws imposing penalties on illegal immigrants was (rightly) struck down. This is just the other side of the coin.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17891750818453472454&q=ariz...
Choices
We all have to make choices in life...
Some of those choices are multi-million $ choices.
The 'sanctuary city'...
...is another reason why Trump won.
Why are all the sanctuary cities
Too expensive for undocumented workers to live in? The police in these cities are to busy enforcing bans on selling loosies, checking parks for kids playing football and cracking down on 7-11's for selling large soda cups. They also have to respond and kick homeless veterans out of gentrified neighborhoods and enforce bans on plastic bags. They can't investigate illegal aliens because they are to busy investigating families who live in the burbs and send their kids to BPS. and follow city workers who live in the suburbs who violate residency. They don't have time to assist the Feds because they have all these other serious duties that politicians mandate they handle.
Everything OK?
You forget to take those pills again?
Boston is a lovely city!
You should come visit it sometime! Walk the Freedom Trail, take a Duck Boat tour, go get a cannoli in the North End, ride the Swan Boats.
I say this because you have clearly never been within a hundred miles of the city or its police officers, so I want to make sure you have an exciting first visit.
Two things to keep in mind
1. The president does not have the authority to simply decree that money will be taken away from these cities. Anyone who thinks this needs to take remedial "government" or "civics" or whatever it was called when they failed it.
2. If and when the congress gets around to eliminating these funds, you can bet that they would be funds that they fully intended to strip from cities regardless of whether they play along with immigration pogroms or not. This is just SEE MY BALLS from the nativist crowd, nothing more.
And, one more for good measure: given that we already see far less money coming back from the federal government than we send in, stripping these funds from our cities and the Commonwealth (under the pretense of OMG SANCTUARY CITY or just plain hatred of all civilization and decency) could be the impetus for us to all learn to sing Oh Canada. After all, it makes no sense for our tax dollars to support restoration of steel mills in the south and not do us any good at all. The current subsidies for red states are bad enough.
Another Point
NYC is a sanctuary city and also has 100's of millions tied up in federal funding. Money going to Trumps 5th avenue neighbors, be they friend or foe.
Congress can't eliminate funding in with a scapel. He'd be stepping on the toes of his own should he persue it, as you can't punish Libby Cambridge and look the other way Bastard town NYC.
NYC Federal funding
The Secret Service is considering renting a floor in Trump Tower, viewed as necessary to the protection for the Trump family when they are in residence. That would require federal funding.....
Renting space from a Trump
Renting space from a Trump building in NYC is not the same as providing funding to the city government.
MA could lose federal money?
You mean like they and 15 other states do now?
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-vaPvTghrTPA/UTAOUgo3JpI/AAAAAAAAARI/aaPXax7-fF...
Your blog sucks
No way I'm clicking that. Even if I'm behind 11 boxxys.
If you think that's my blog
You're out of your (expletive) mind. Son, I just copied the first map on Google Images which made my point.
Trumps all talk, he doesnt
Trumps all talk, he doesnt care about anything but tax cuts for the wealthy and using the presidency to enhance his business interests. He has already walked back his claim he would never settle Trump U lawsuit (did it right after the election), now believes climate change might be real, that he was going to be an outsider against wall street (just selected as treasury secretary a wall street insider). He has no values other than to get peoples attention and get richer.
An excuse for just shifting Federal funds?
Perhaps the flap about Sanctuary Cities is more of a political excuse to shift money from one budget item to another? Trump claims he wants to improve infrastructure but cut taxes. How? Start by reducing Federal spending in other areas. What is a politically easy target for an conservative Congress? The idea of any city calling itself a sanctuary city.
Create an image of cities that are somehow interfering with Federal laws (false but truth is irrelevant), get political support behind the claim and then use that political support to shift money in future budgets by denying Federal funds to sanctuary cities on the claim that they are interfering with enforcement of Federal law. Claim this is a legitimate way to punish the misbehaving cities.
The issue then never truly was about immigration. It was about finding a way to create political support for eliminating Federal funds from cities that Trump et al. dislike.
In how many other ways can immigration be the new (self) righteous cause of the conservative establishment? Twist it to be an excuse for cutting Medicare or Medicaid or Social Security by claiming the benefits are going to illegal immigrants (again facts are irrelevant). Immigrants could be characterized as a source of disease that must be eradicated. Trump has already portrayed immigrants as a thousands if not millions of rapists all looking for virgins to ravish. Illegal immigration could be the conservative cause that keeps giving excuses for more and more political craziness.