Tennessee wants to criminalize public officials who vote for sanctuary policies
- Thread starter lonestar50
- Start date
If all levels of law enforcement have followed the law and have the proper documents, then “yes”. They should be turned over.
Two issues, though.
I have no issue with local officials ensuring the law is followed. If detainees weren’t afforded their rights (including being rounded up under an administrative warrant in a private space), then ICE can go pound sand.
Additionally, this is about penalizing a vote. Not the act of obstructing or delaying the apprehension and detention of an illegal. Penalizing a vote is absurd.
Good to see you coming around.
There are no excuses for why jails in leftwing jurisdictions are not cooperating with ICE and turning them over to a detainer.
It's safer for the detainee, the agents and the public.
You really don’t want to discuss penalties for taking a vote, do you?
Look at us making progress.
However, if you use “irregardless” on this board, I’m giving you a nut tap. Hard.
It's regardless.
And my god, that's why we have laws -- there is legal recourse for people/states that break law.
Making merely voting a certain way punishable by law is horrendously undemocratic.
Last edited:
Gov. Bill Lee probably needs to be shot.
I mean, if we make that a law, we should make a law that allows undemocratic creeps like Gov Lee to be shot by concerned citizens without repercussions.
I understand.
But know that a movement is afoot.
Is 'irregardless' a real word?
Hmmm. We have a convicted felon as President now and not because of how he voted.
When that law is immoral. Unethical. Unconstitutional. Down right absolutely 100% Un-American. Yes. I’d hope they would obstruct at every point.
its my wordI understand.
But know that a movement is afoot.
Is 'irregardless' a real word?
It's immoral, unethical, unconstitutional and un American to turn over an illegal immigrant who has been charged with child rape?
So all these immigrants are guilty of child rape?
Just trying to understand your outrage here.
no, I have been specifically talking about detainers for those who are arrested for other crimes
Can't believe you topped out at male nurse but here we are.
My ex-wife would run circles around you as a medical professional.
Politicians voting on being a sanctuary for people that have committed crimes are committing a crime. They are voting to harbor criminals from federal enforcement. Which other crimes do local and state officials get to vote on and hide criminal activity?
That shit doesn't work any longer. Immigration law belongs to the feds. It is part of pur founding documents so is not a states rights issue at all.
Tell your state and local officials to stop harboring criminals and voting to do so
By all means, we should trash the First Amendment along the way to ensure your white paradise.
For the “law and order” party, you guys seems awfully quick to disregard the Constitution
This is not concerning at all. The entire country is sliding down a very slippery slope
As Gov. Bill Lee’s immigration enforcement plan moves swiftly through the Tennessee Legislature, one component of the bill — aimed at arresting local officials who support sanctuary policies for immigrants — drew scrutiny Tuesday.
Included in the governor’s wide-ranging proposal to coordinate with the Trump Administration on mass immigrant detentions and deportations is a provision that creates a Class E felony for public officials who vote to adopt or enact sanctuary policies. Sanctuary policies can shield undocumented immigrants and limit cooperation with enforcement action
The felony charge, punishable by up to six years in prison and a $3,000 fine, would apply to any public official who votes in favor of a sanctuary law, policy or on non-binding resolutions.
Sen. Todd Gardenhire, the Republican chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, blasted the provision Tuesday as a “dangerous precedent.”
“We are a Republic, and a Republic is one that we elect people to vote the way they feel like is best for the district, the city, county or the state,” he said.
“If we set the precedent of penalizing any elected official for voting their conscience, whether it’s good or bad, then we set a dangerous precedent for the future,” he said.
Democrats characterized the provision as a “slippery slope” that could be invoked in future legislation to criminalize votes on any controversial issue.
“It is alarming we are sitting here talking about felonizing elected officials taking votes on behalf of their constituency,” Sen. Heidi Campbell, a Nashville Democrat, said. “Boy, this is a slippery slope and be careful what you wish for if you vote for this.”
Gardenhire was in the minority among Republicans who dominate the Senate Judiciary Committee he chairs. They quickly shot down Gardenhire’s efforts to amend the bill to remove criminal penalties before voting to advance it in the legislature.
Sanctuary policies are already prohibited by a 2019 Tennessee law that sought to prevent local governments from adopting sanctuary city status —as some other Democrat-led cities across the country have done.
The 2019 Tennessee law gives citizens the right to file civil suits challenging any jurisdiction’s adoption of sanctuary policies and the state the power to withhold funding over violations.
“When the state banned sanctuary cities, its remedies were to deny cities grants and to seek a court order,” said Ken Paulson, director of the Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University.
“Here the state is trying to control the actions of duly-elected officials through the police power,” he said. “That’s a dramatic escalation.”
One national government accountability expert said he knew of no other state law that threatened to prosecute public officials for how they cast a vote.
“It’s an unprecedented power grab and criminalization of political discourse,” said Dan Vicuña, director of redistricting and representation for Common Cause, a Washington, D.C. advocacy group.
“It puts at risk the basic right to local representative and democratic government,” he said.
And local legal experts, among them the legislature’s own attorney, said the provision may be “constitutionally suspect.”
“Generally speaking Tennessee courts have found legislative bodies have legislative immunity for acts that serve part of their legislative function and that legislative immunity extends to local legislative bodies,” Elizabeth Insogna, a Legislative attorney, told the committee.
“It’s possible that a criminal provision that is enforced against a member of a legislative body may be constitutionally suspect,” she said. “It would be up for a court to determine.”
John Vile, professor of political science and Dean of the University Honors College at Middle Tennessee State University said “legislators should heed Article 1” of the Tennessee Constitution, which establishes a “Declaration of Rights” for citizens and their elected representatives.
“I don’t know of any other laws, state or federal, that penalize elected officials on the basis of how they vote,” he said. “This seems to defeat the whole purpose of democratic-republican (representative) government.
Republicans however noted the criminal penalties are aimed at elected officials attempting to pass legislation already outlawed in Tennessee.
“I think everybody would agree that’s something that elected officials should be prohibited from doing, or should not do,” said Sen. Kerry Roberts, a Springfield Republican. “The fact there’s a consequence for it, I personally don’t have a problem with that, because they ought not to be doing it in the first place. It’s illegal.”
Only two current laws provide criminal penalties for lawmakers acting in their official capacities, according to Stephen Crump, executive director of the Tennessee District Attorneys General Conference. One longstanding law allows criminal charges to be brought against county commissioners who fail to adequately fund local jails. Other lawmakers may be charged if their vote violates official misconduct statutes.
Senate Majority Leader Jack Johnson, in an emailed statement, said the criminal penalties “reflect the overwhelming belief of our constituents, who have made it clear that they expect us to work in lockstep with the Trump administration to enforce federal immigration laws.”
“Requiring localities and public officials to comply with federal law is not a matter of political opinion,” the statement said. “It reflects a commitment to upholding the rule of law and ensures consistency between federal and state efforts to address immigration challenges.”
Johnson’s statement noted that, should the bill succeed, ultimately, be up to judges to decide how to weigh the law.
“Should an elected official choose to enact a sanctuary policy and be charged under this legislation, I am confident that a court would carefully consider whether absolute legislative immunity applies to acts that are criminal under both state and federal law.”
Bill criminalizing votes for immigrant sanctuary policies ‘constitutionally suspect’ • Tennessee Lookout
A Tennessee measure aimed at arresting local officials who support sanctuary city policies for immigrants is 'constitutionally suspect.'tennesseelookout.com
What would your opinion be if public officials legalized murder?
Well. It absolutely is a first amendment issue.
The staff attorney for the TN Legislature (which has a GOP supermajority) stated that the law is constitutionally suspect.
But…yeah…I’m stupid. Got it
Of course it is. One part of the law makes it a felony to vote on a non-binding resolution. That’s the legislators expressing their opinion and is First Amendment protected.
Further, legislators have immunity for their votes under the speech and debate clause.
They can do that. Murder is a state crime and if a state no longer wants to criminalize that conduct, they can change the law.
Simple. Sanctuary policies violate federal law. Simply voting for one shouldn't be an offense, but if the vote passes, then anyone who enforces the sanctuary policy or directs anyone else to should probably be charged under federal law.
Why is that hard?
This is a single issue, not a slippery slope.
Why is that hard?
This is a single issue, not a slippery slope.
“Enforce” vs a vote of conscience. That’s the slippery slope.
You guys are defending a piece of legislation that criminalizes a vote. Not an act of obstruction, but a god damn vote.
You’ve lost your minds.
Of course it’s a slippery slope. A few years back, Mississippi passed an abortion law that violated then existing federal law, Roe.
Should every person who enforced or attempted to enforce the MS law before Roe was changed have been charged with a felony? Of course not.
That’s why we have courts to address these issues.
This post is pretty cringe.
And the thing is, most of these people understood, before Trump, that if a local government passes a law that conflicts with federal law the answer is to have that law thrown out in court. Only because they are now in a cult do they deny everything our country stands for and support criminalizing it.
It's disgusting and depressing to watch.
Yes, ICE is not the boss of local law enforcement. Also ICE is not a court of law either.
Local law enforcement can't specifically impede federal law enforcement, but local law enforcement is not and never has been required to cooperate with or obey their orders/commands/requests
You go to a super red county and ATF comes in looking for people making moonshine and illegally modifying guns, you think the local sheriff's office is going to help ATF with any of that??? Guarantee they wouldn't even give ATF agents directions to the nearest gas station, much less cooperate or help them with any of the people they are looking for.
When you have a criminal alien in custody and you release him before ICE can pick him up or you refuse to notify ICE that you have an illegal, you are in fact undermining the rule of law and you should be federally prosecuted.
Do you remember when Texas and Arizona tried to implement their own anti illegal immigration measures because Biden would stop the invasion and the Biden administration sued them and made the remove their barriers? That is okay in your mind, but holding leftist municipalities accountable for breaking the law by releasing criminals is different, right Jerome?
Latest posts
-
Iowa WBB gets 11-seed, rematch with Wisconsin in Big Ten Tournament- Latest: TigersHawks
-
I de-committed, and nobody wanted to be my friend. (Kadyn Proctor)
- Latest: TigersHawks
-
-
-
