For a city whose police department has a demonstrated penchant for profiling enforcement towards Hispanics these ordinances reach new heights for defining hypocrisy. Efforts wold be better directed to getting police behaviors under control.

A sanctuary city by any other name--safe city etc., is still an illegal sanctuary city. We should be supporting our police officers and ICE in their attempts to enact the law. Where does choosing which laws to uphold and which to break end? If I don't agree with a law, am I entitled to break it? I can think of a few laws I don't much like and laws that I think are unreasonable, so I can just go ahead and break them? Oh, what fun for me, though maybe not for others.

Stan, Would you like to cite evidence to your claim? Maybe you should not make baseless accusations.

I personally think that the city council should defer on this and let the residents of Menlo Park decide in an election. This has the possibility of costing Menlo Park a lot of money if Trump carries through on his threats and it seems the city is already welcoming immigrants and not stopping them and checking on their status. I have not seen anyone explaining a tangible benefit that the city or the residents (legal or illegal) get from this.

From what I read yesterday, the threat of losing federal funds appears to be limited (per Attorney General Sessions) to ICE funds, not other types of federal funding. Here's more from Cato: Web Link

Whatever we decide to call it–sanctuary, safe, compassionate, etc.–I would think that our city would want to limit the degree to which our local law enforcement officers can be co-opted by ICE. They've got enough on their plate. Moreover, ICE appears to be deporting not just Trump's stereotypical "bad hombres" but also members who are contributing to society, including "dreamers" whose only crime was being brought to the US as children.

"if Trump carries through on his threats"

hahaha,hohohah, wait, let me catch my breath, hahahhahahhohaha, stoppit, yer killing me, hahah...

That's a funny one!

What promise has Trump fulfilled, other than some EO's that aren't worth the paper they're printed on? He has reneged or flopped on virtually everything he has said in his life - abortion, social security, single payer, even whether he was a dirty rotten democrat.

Seriously - do you actually believe this guy when he spews forth?

Katie, please explain what you mean by "limit the degree to which our local law enforcement officers can be co-opted by ICE" I do not understand how ICE can co-opt anyone. If they choose to do a raid they do not need local police (see the rain is Santa Cruz a few months ago).

As for Trump carrying out his promise to withdraw funds from "sanctuary cities" yes, I think it is possible. he has so far done a lot to keept his promise to stop "Muslim immigration" only to be stopped by the courts, he worked hard to overthrow the ACA and deportations of illegal immigrants are up since he took office, so you can bury your head in the sand if you want I prefer to avoid making the city a target when as far as I can see there are no benefits for the city or any of the residents (legal or illegal)

More NONSENSE from out 'enlightened' city leaders. What part of the word
"ILLEGAL" do you not understand? Your defiance of federal laws shows your ignorance and lack of principled leadership. An ABSOLUTE embarrassing joke.
The lesson for our children -- "flaunt the law" and 'middle finger' authority.

"he worked hard to OVERTHROW the ACA" (bolded due to use of past tense, ie.. a lie)

He spent an afternoon twisting some arms to pass a useless bill out of the house to modify a law (the ACA) that took thousands of hours to pass.

Let's see how hard he works on the senate version. How long has he spent thus far on his signature "promise"?

hint: zero, zip, nada

Don't tell me, wait, are you one of those rare people that actually BELIEVE Trump?!? I still haven't met one of those - I'm honored to be in your (online) presence!

Brian
Sorry to say this is not a baseless claim. I am not at liberty to cite names or dates in this case because the people involved were in fear of retaliation and did not file a complaint. This occurred several years ago and I did write a letter to the Town council and to the Town's attorney. I never had the courtesy of a reply from either.
Suffice to say a domestic worker and then the owner of the company she worked for were detained, questioned, and "photographed for our records" by Menlo Park police because of suspicion of being Hispanic in a non-Hispanic neighborhood during mid-morning hours. Even though the woman whose house they were going to came out and identified them as individuals who worked for her, the police were on a mission. By golly they had an alien face and they were dead set on trying to build a case. And even when they were wrong they couldn't even find it within themselves to apologize. It's this kind of behavior that builds the kind of distrust that the apologists that tout safe or sanctuary cities say they are trying to avoid. Rather that pursuing populist themes the Town council should be focused on correcting real problems and most of all listening when someone documents a problem for them.

Sorry Stan, without evidence it could all just be made up in your head. You say "...Menlo Park police because of suspicion of being Hispanic in a non-Hispanic neighborhood during mid-morning hours" that sounds like BS and something you are making up or assuming. You could say anything but without proof it doesn't matter.

Should I claim Atherton is biased because I was pulled over late at night on Middlefield driving an older SUV because my "vehicle registration was about to expire" (had not expired yet but would have in about 3 weeks)? Would it make a difference if I were black, hispanic, Asian? No, it was just an over zealous officer who got an earful for it.

So my advice is that you either get something stronger than hearsay to back up your claims or don't make accusations you can't support.

Homeland,

As I said you believe what you want that is up to you. I prefer not to go looking for trouble when there is no benefit to be gained.

Regardless of what you think about Trump, he is carry through on some of his threats and while he is getting blocked on many things by the courts, and rightly so, it can be a costly endeavor to challenge Executive Orders.

Sounds like a big virtue-signal exercise by the Council to me.

If the Council decides not to follow the law, do I get to choose which of my Menlo Park property taxes I'd like not to pay?

"Regardless of what you think about Trump, he is carry through on some of his threats"

Just because you say it twice, or say it louder, doesn't make it true. I repeat:

"What promise has Trump fulfilled, other than some EO's that aren't worth the paper they're printed on?"

Brian
I would suppose that if you had heard the same story from the people involved you would probably, similarly, accuse them of fabricating the event. I doubt there is anything that would convince you other wise.
I can tell you that they were both distraught and crying over the event in the afternoon when they arrived here after being accosted by the Menlo Park police. If you wish to disbelieve why don't you ask the attorney for Menlo Park.
For my part, I make whatever efforts I can to support and trust implicitly people who have worked in my home for well over 15 years and will continue to speak out on their behalf when it is the right thing to do.

@Homeland Security
Legislatively, Trump hasn't done much, except repeal some Obama era regulations. You're right about that. But then again, Trump is head of the executive branch, not the legislative branch.

From the executive branch standpoint, a lot has changed. The real power of the presidency lies in control of the bureaucracy. With respect to immigration, the major changes include:

1) Higher immigration arrests and deportations Web Link

2) Reassigning more judges to immigration courts speed up cases
Web Link

3) Increased scrutiny of visitor visas
Web Link

The risk with any sanctuary city ordinance is that it would put a target on Menlo Park's back. Under the law, it's not supposed to make a difference. In reality, it does because bureaucrats have a lot of leeway how they do their jobs.

Consider high speed rail funding. If California applied for this funding during a Republican administration, it would have been denied. But it applied for the funding under Obama's watch and it was approved, though the last portion of it was almost denied by Trump recently.

Keystone pipeline was denied under Obama. It was approved under Trump.

Theoretically, no federal funding should be lost due to a sanctuary ordinance. In reality, there is a political and financial price to be paid.

There's nothing wrong with taking a stand to support immigrants. I just don't think politicians should sugarcoat it by saying there are no downsides just because the negative effects are harder to discern.

"Theoretically, no federal funding should be lost due to a sanctuary ordinance."

Agreed.

"In reality, there is a political and financial price to be paid."

Yet, in reality, you offer no explanation or proof of your claim.

And your list? 4 months in, and he hasn't achieved a tenth of what he promised for Day One. So that makes him both incompetent AND a LIAR.

You did forget a few things, like giving a hundred billion dollar arms deal to Saudi Arabia in exchange for Web Link and Web Link

Saudi Arabia with ANOTHER 100 billion in weapons - wow, that will guarantee peace in the middle east!!

Please keep defending him. Pretty rare to find someone willing to do so.

So: in 4 months he hasn't achieved a tenth of what he promised for Day One alone. So that makes him both incompetent AND a LIAR.

Which takes us back to: why should anyone believe the incompetent Liar-in Chief's threats about sanctuary cities?

Please remember, it is a crime to use some other person's name when posting.

Let's talk about crime. It is illegal to break into accounts and steal private emails. If Trump or his team coordinated with Russians about when to release stolen emails to WikiLeaks for the most impact, that is collusion. We know that Trump bragged about how much he loves Wikileaks. WikiLeaks publish illegally obtained private emails. Trump bragged about Wikileaks more that he bragged about grabbing p***y, but he bragged about that as well. We know that AG Jeff Sessions doesn't like sanctuary cities, but he also lied about meeting with Russians, under oath. Can you imagine a more hateful or dishonest administration? These unnecessary deportations are a way for Trump to show the world what a thug he is. Unfortunately, there are many decent, law abiding individuals that are afraid to contact the police because a family member is here illegally. Let's force Trump take Federal funds from his asinine "Great Wall" project to fund his ICE thugs.

The city is free to prioritize how our city tax dollars are used. Regardless of whatever nonsense you may have heard on Fox News, it is not illegal for the city to enforce that cops the their job. If the city has cops that want to be on Trump's thug patrol, it is a fee country, these "bad apples" can resign and go work for ICE.

Forget "safe" cities!!! Why should we American taxpayers have to support people who are here illegally in our country?!? Send the illegals back to where they came from, and let their own countries take care of them!!! Law enforcement personnel following the law and working with ICE to deport illegals have my support and respect, as do ICE employees themselves who are doing their job in returning illegals to their respective countries. Stop spending my taxpayer dollars on medical, education, housing, food, etc., etc., for illegals here in the United States of America!!!

@HS

"Yet, in reality, you offer no explanation or proof of your claim."

I gave you two examples: Keystone and HSR. Need another example? Trump could have stuck it to California by denying Caltrain electrification funding even though Congress already set aside most of the money. It would have been the first time a project that received such high marks from the US Transportation Department to be denied funding. While the Trump administration ultimately approved the project, the delay cost California tens of millions of dollars.

Most politicians are subtle with their political retribution. Trump is direct. The city can take a principled stand. It should not cower to him. But it should do it with full understanding of the ramifications.

I'm not defending Trump. You made the point he doesn't follow through on his threats/promises. I disagree. He actually does when it falls under the exclusive purview of the executive branch. He's ineffective at getting anything done if he has to work with Congress.

Read 8 United States Code Section 1324

No surprises. MP voted 80% for Clinton. Slow walking Demo-zombies virtue signalling at every opportunity. I'm wearing my shocked face right now.

"Keystone and HSR."

Oh, please, the winning, all this winning, it's too much! I'm tired of all the winning!

Yes, I recall with fondness the Trump rallies where he led chants of "build Keystone so my donor scores" and "stop infrastructure", along with the "Mexico pays for the wall" chants and 'lock her up' (who knew Flynn and the gang will see jail time before her - oh wait, we all did, we just thought it would be Manafort or Paige first.)


CNN: Despite Trump promises, Keystone pipeline won't have to use American steel Web Link

Keystone XL pipeline would only create 35 permanent jobs - Web Link


Trump won't be attacking Menlo Park for statements of sanctuary support.

Well, maybe a 3am tweet or two from from the Liar, but I doubt even that.

He has to figure a way to pay for his wall.

I'm curious, are you one of the ten percent who voted for Trump?

"Coming soon to YOUR neighborhood...". MP City Council -- Dufuses of the first magnitude.

The Obama administration knowingly let in at least 16 admitted MS-13 gang members who arrived at the U.S. as illegal immigrant teenagers in 2014, a top senator said Wednesday, citing internal documents that showed the teens were shipped to juvenile homes throughout the country.

Sen. Ron Johnson, chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, said a whistleblower turned over Customs and Border Protection documents from 2014 detailing the 16 persons who were caught crossing the border.

“CBP apprehended them, knew they were MS-13 gang members, and they processed and disbursed them into our communities,” Mr. Johnson, Wisconsin Republican, said.

The gang members were part of the surge of UAC, or “unaccompanied alien children,” as the government labels them, who overwhelmed the Obama administration in 2014, leaving Homeland Security struggling to staunch the flow from Central America.

Officials at the time said the children should be treated as refugees fleeing horrific conditions back home — though security analysts said the children were prime recruiting territory for gangs already in the U.S.

@law abider:

A 3 hour old report about "leaked" documents from the fringe right WashTimes. Another pizzagate hoax you got courtesy Breitbart?

A Seth Rich fable?

Web Link "Meanwhile, the Washington Post published an article mocking conservatives for focusing on the FOX News report rather than their own story.
Some of the few outlets to report on the story include the Washington Times...."

Sanctuary Cities are nothing more than holding pens for prey for Illegal Alien Criminals. Never mentioned is the existence of the U Visa which protects Illegal Aliens who report or are a victim of crime. I wonder why?

Web Link
U.S.Sanctuary Bills in Maryland Faced a Surprise Foe: Legal Immigrants

"The failure of the sanctuary bills in Maryland reveals a potentially troublesome fissure for Democrats as they rush to defy Mr. Trump. Their party has staked out an activist position built around protecting undocumented immigrants. But it is one that has alienated many who might have been expected to support it."

Obama administration has admitted that Sanctuary Cities are a problem:
Web Link

But, within the above letter, doesn't really address what the Obama administration will actually do about it to protect US Citizens:

Web Link

Web Link

Web Link

IGS poll: Californians oppose sanctuary city policies

"Californians strongly oppose “sanctuary city” policies under which local authorities ignore federal requests to detain undocumented immigrants who have been arrested but are about to be released, according to a new poll released today by the Institute of Governmental Studies (IGS) at UC Berkeley."

Hi Everyone,

We're one of the most powerful set of zipcodes in the Country, let's make it even more official with Pure Citizenship. Let's make Atherton and Menlo Park entirely gated communities with citizenship-based access only. Guest must show their ID to guards at the gate. Let's just have Southern California be the "Sanctuary" part.

Who is with me? Grab your shovels and your torches, let's get this done!

Let's also enforce non-Radical Islamic groups and require all houses and buildings to put up a flagpole with the American flag waving in it. If they don't there will be a $500 tax fee for the residents per month - the town governments need all the money they can get right now.

Even the gigantic Facebook campus doesn't have a flag pole on Marsh Road. For all its efforts, the sign could be a middle finger pointing at its neighbors.

Let's drain the money of the National haters! Let's make a difference, period!

Your 2015 IGS poll is a couple years old, and an online poll.

The new IGS poll last month shows:


-Fewer Californians — about 36 percent — view illegal immigration as a “very serious problem” compared to 10 years ago, when 49 percent felt it was a serious concern."

-An estimated 82 percent of Californians support granting a pathway to citizenship to undocumented immigrants who have lived in the U.S. a number of years, have a job, have not committed a serious crime, have learned English and pay taxes. A majority of Republicans also favored this approach.

-Nearly 60 percent of Californians oppose President Donald Trump’s plans to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

-About half of voters surveyed — an estimated 49 percent — believe the U.S. borders are secure, while 51 percent said they are not. But the majority of Republicans — about 76 percent — believe U.S. borders aren’t secure, while 61 percent of Democrats said they are.


Sources:
- Web Link
March 29, 2017
Californians hold divided and partisan views about sanctuary cities, contrasting with bipartisan support for providing undocumented immigrants a pathway to citizenship and opposition to building the U.S.-Mexico wall. The poll is covered in the Sacramento Bee, San Jose Mercury News and New York Times.

- Report: Californians divided over state’s sanctuary cities, oppose border wall
Web Link


But seriously - you start with a crazy, indefensible bomb like this? "Sanctuary Cities are nothing more than holding pens for prey for Illegal Alien Criminals."

And you links do not substantiate your crazy opinion - at all.

Sad.

Sounds like this discussion has fallen to trolls who are not open to having a legitimate discussion and who like to hide behind made up names. Hope you stay here and don't pollute the other discussions.