Turning Nevada into a ‘sanctuary state’ could have severe consequences

ICE agents at work in Las Vegas. (R-J pix)

ICE agents at work in Las Vegas. (R-J pix)

Be careful what you ask for, because you just might get it — good and hard.

Democratic state Sen. Yvanna Cancela of Las Vegas, along with a number of fellow Democrats, has introduced a bill that would turn Nevada into a “sanctuary state” by forbidding law enforcement cooperating with federal immigration authorities in identifying persons who are in this country illegally.

Senate Bill 223 states:

No state or local law enforcement agency, school police unit or campus police department shall:
(a) Use money, facilities, property, equipment or personnel of the agency, unit or department to investigate, interrogate, detain, detect or arrest a person for the purposes of immigration enforcement, including, without limitation:
(1) Inquiring into or collecting information about the immigration status of a person.
(2) Detaining a person on the basis of a hold request, except where there is an independent finding of probable cause.
(3) Responding to a notification request or transfer request.
(4) Providing or responding to a request for nonpublic personal information about a person, including, without limitation, information about the person’s home address, work address or date of release from custody.
(5) Making an arrest on the basis of a civil immigration warrant, except where there is an independent finding of probable cause.

Etc. Etc. Etc.

Under a program called 287(g) local cooperating police departments, which includes Clark County, that take a suspected illegal immigrant into custody notify U.S. Immigration Customs and Enforcement agents and they have 48 hours to pick up that person.

According to an account in the Las Vegas newspaper, in the past that rarely happened, but in recent weeks ICE officers are at the jail almost every day, apparently stepping up enforcement of immigration laws under the Trump administration.

Under SB223 this would come to a screeching halt.

But Tump has threatened to withhold federal funds from sanctuary cities. He signed an executive order directing government officials to identify federal money that can be withheld to punish “sanctuary cities.”

So what could this mean for the “sanctuary state” of Nevada?

The state’s total budget for the past two years was $26 billion. Fully $9 billion of that came from federal funds, according to the state budget.

Passing SB223 could have serious consequences to the taxpayers of Nevada, but that has never stopped the self-righteous Democrats, has it?


12 comments on “Turning Nevada into a ‘sanctuary state’ could have severe consequences

  1. deleted says:

    Any idea what the negative consequences of not being a sanctuary state would be for Nevada? How about the positive consequences of having the Bill become law?

    And what ever happened to states rights and the 10th Amendment? I thought a principled libertarian would be much more supportive of a state telling the “jackbooted thugs” from the overreaching federal government to go to hades.

    And since the orange mans threat is likely unconstitutional and is more than balanced out against all the positive impacts of the law including a cheap pool of labor that don’t need no stinking minimum wages or other bureaucratic red tape protections, that some conservatives would be in favor. And not just those liberals looking to make sure little people are taken care of.

  2. So he who must not be named sides with lawbreakers…some of which are violent or negligent felons, and against the lawful citizens of the United States. The executive branch is designated to enact and enforce immigration law by the constitution (the looney left ninth circuit court of appeals notwithstanding). Legal immigration is a very desirable plus for everyone involved…illegal immigration…not so much. If Nevada is foolish enough to listen to the haranguing of the progressive culteral Marxists now in control of the Democrat party…so be it. Take away all federal funds to the state until they comply with the laws already on the books. Do you lock your doors at night or when you leave in the daytime HWMNBN?

  3. Anonymous says:

    So HFB sides with the jack booted big gov’ment thugs over the side of truth justice and the 10th Amendment? (This is fun, making shit up for the other side, I got to do it more often)

    If illegal immigration weren’t so profitable for the millionaires and billionaires that populate the far right wing lunatic side of the political spectrum, it would have been stopped years ago (they don’t demand minimum wage, or benefits, or ask to see evidence of worker’s compensation insurance you know).

    One big reason that liberals like me object so much to the current rage amongst the far right lunatic fringe is because these guys just hate people because of their skin color and that strikes me, being a Christian and all, as racist. Do you grip your pocketbook extra hard when you see someone of color walking nearby? XYZOMPRCT

  4. He sure keeps that good ole’ race card handy…isn’t it worn out yet?

  5. Steve says:

    None of those stories support Patrick’s brand of deflective hype.

  6. Barbara says:

    A police officer takes an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. The Constitution gives Congress the authority to make laws related to immigration. Doesn’t a legislator take the same oath? Any legislator who would vote for such a law is not upholding his/her oath and should be removed from office.

    Better yet, any legislator who votes for such a bill should be held personally accountable for all financial costs associated with allowing illegal aliens to remain in the state. This would also mean they could be sued when an illegal alien commits a crime and injures someone.

  7. deleted says:

    I’d be interested to get a citation to the language that a state violates when it refuses to use any state instrumentality to enforce any immigration provision that is enacted by Congress.

    And since of course, none exist, for conservatives to assert that, because local or state police take an oath to protect the Constitution, I seems that Conservatives, out of one side of their mouths talk about “states rights” and the beloved “10th Amendment” and out of the other sides of their mouths about how states need to relinquish their rights;

    I fear for our republic.

  8. Steve says:

    Children brought here by their illegal immigrant parents are not responsible for the actions of their parents.
    The only issue I have with them is they should have applied for naturalization as soon as they became old enough to act on their own or first found out they are not US citizens.
    Other than that, these people are as much US residents as anyone born here.

    Other than this, people here illegally are already breaking our laws.

    Trump is having a very positive effect in this regard.
    Why would anyone have a problem with this?

    May 27 Washington Post.
    Citizenship applications soar in Trump’s wake


  9. Spot on Steve and Barbara. Which brings us to the curious case of Astrid Silva, part of Harry Reid’s dog and pony show on the national stage to promote illegal immigration whenever it suits their agenda. Astrid came to America (supposedly clutching her Ken doll at the age of 4). She is now 28 years old and was the designated hitter to critique President Trumps speech on a spanish network. So please explain why Astrid…local community organizer, failed to simply apply for citizenship sometime during the last 24 years? Why would she…she’s been given a college education by local progressive activist groups. She’s been flown to DC to sit in the gallery during President Obama’s State of the Union speeches. She was flown to the Democrat convention last year to speak of her “plight.” Quite frankly…she’s living rather nicely on her “victim status” and even worked as an illegal alien to register hispanic voters for the last election…which I find more than a bit troubling. She should be given 6 months to apply for citizenship…or ship her out to Mexico…period.

  10. deleted says:

    Second time in as many weeks that white guys parroting the orange mans rhetoric have committed terrorist acts.

    I wonder if the don is going to be afraid to use the word in this case?

    “The victim, a 39-year-old Sikh man, was working on his vehicle in his driveway in Kent’s East Hill neighborhood about 8 p.m. Friday when he was approached by an unknown man, Kent police said, after talking with the victim.

    An altercation followed, with the victim saying the suspect made statements to the effect of “Go back to your own country.” The victim was shot in the arm.

    “The victim described the shooter as a 6-foot-tall white man with a stocky build. He was wearing a mask covering the lower half of his face, the victim said.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s