In final days of session, legislature advances Landry immigration agenda

SB15 criminalizes the failure of local officials – including sheriffs and other law enforcement officers – to cooperate with federal immigration agencies, with penalties of up to 10 years in prison.

Up to 10 years in prison if you refuse to blindly follow orders? Seems reasonable /s

It also criminalizes acts by everyday Louisiana residents deemed to obstruct or “thwart” federal immigration enforcement efforts. It passed 71-30.

"Thwart" immigration efforts seems like it could be very loosely interpreted to mean anything from intentionally or even unintentionally obstructing or delaying efforts, peacefully protesting or expressing dissent, potentially interpreted to punish immigration lawyers for doing their job.

Also, just pointing out the city of New Orleans was already on that DHS list of jurisdictions in violation of Trump's sanctuary policy

Feels like it would have been less passive aggressive to just @ the city within the actual text of the bill.

“The Orleans Parish Sheriff, who should be trying to get out from under the handcuffs of the consent decree, [is] using that as a shield to avoid the possible implications of refusing to cooperate with ICE,” Morris told committee members.

Also, love this argument (especially as we're watching riots in L.A. and the city of Glendale canceling it's own contract with ICE) bc it essentially seems to be saying take off those old handcuffs, and put on these new much more restrictive handcuffs.

SB15 criminalizes the failure of local officials – including sheriffs and other law enforcement officers – to cooperate with federal immigration agencies, with penalties of up to 10 years in prison.

Up to 10 years in prison if you refuse to blindly follow orders? Seems reasonable /s

It also criminalizes acts by everyday Louisiana residents deemed to obstruct or “thwart” federal immigration enforcement efforts. It passed 71-30.

"Thwart" immigration efforts seems like it could be very loosely interpreted to mean anything from intentionally or even unintentionally obstructing or delaying efforts, peacefully protesting or expressing dissent, potentially interpreted to punish immigration lawyers for doing their job.

Also, just pointing out the city of New Orleans was already on that DHS list of jurisdictions in violation of Trump's sanctuary policy

Feels like it would have been less passive aggressive to just @ the city within the actual text of the bill.

“The Orleans Parish Sheriff, who should be trying to get out from under the handcuffs of the consent decree, [is] using that as a shield to avoid the possible implications of refusing to cooperate with ICE,” Morris told committee members.

Also, love this argument (especially as we're watching riots in L.A. and the city of Glendale canceling it's own contract with ICE) bc it essentially seems to be saying take off those old handcuffs, and put on these new much more restrictive handcuffs.

Durr we luv smol gubmint and freedum 🖕

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/66472753

It's been so crazy that I forgot all about the DHS list of jurisdictions in violation of the Trump administration's policy on sanctuary cities according to his EO released on April 28th. Apparently they published it last week and immediately took it back down.

When the EO was released, I figured my own city would be on the list, and it was, along with 36 other ~~jurisdictions~~ states. There are hundreds of counties listed

So can't say for sure, but it definitely has me a little nervous that all the jurisdictions on that list could soon be facing what we're seeing play out in California. The mayor said, she believes what is happening in L.A. is a test run, and I agree with her 100%

Who controls the National Guard? The National Guard is a hybrid entity that serves both state and federal interests and often operates under state command and control, using state funding.

Sometimes, troops will be assigned by their state to serve federal missions, remaining under state command but using federal funding.

Generally, federal military forces are not allowed to carry out civilian law enforcement duties against U.S. citizens except in times of emergency.

When can the National Guard be deployed? An 18th-century wartime law called the Insurrection Act is the main legal mechanism that a president can use to activate the military or National Guard during times of rebellion or unrest. But President Donald Trump didn’t invoke the Insurrection Act on Saturday when deploying the National Guard to Los Angeles.

What about the National Guard in Texas? Back in February, Gov. Greg Abbott gave Texas Guard members authority to arrest and detain people for entering the U.S. illegally from Mexico under an agreement with the Trump administration that expands the military’s role in immigration enforcement.

Well good thing the U.S. economy is rock solid at the moment, and we have excess money to burn.

Otherwise we might start seeing bipartisan anger at a president and administration who have spent $134 million dollars to force a state government to do what the federal government says, while undoing previous federal orders regarding civil rights bc they were an unjust burden to states and a waste of the American tax payer dollar.

National Guard members and Marines, called to Los Angeles by President Trump to prevent violent protests, can otherwise only serve in support roles.

"If there's an insurrection, I would certainly invoke it. We will see," he said.

We have not even seen "actual military violence" at this point. Keep that in mind when you argue that it doesn't matter if this escalates further bc what else could Trump do, the answer is this.

Cool...

This one goes out to all the small government, privacy loving, Republicans out there, supposedly hating invasive big brother tactics and representing the values of the American heartland.

Would be much appreciated if you could have a word with your people about this.

DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin told Newsweek that the City of Glendale's decision was "deeply disturbing," and accused state officials of siding with criminals over public safety after unrest in Los Angeles.

Just so people are aware, this is the same rhetoric/same regurgitated talking points being used against "progressive" policies in blue cities within red states all over the country.

They are banking on an escalation of physical violence and confrontation that they will use as an excuse to establish a permanent federal and military force in California that will not be subject to any California state laws.

Why do I believe that? Because its how it happened in my own city to establish a permanent state police force that can't be regulated by any city or local ordinance.

They instigate and then argue that progressive policies have resulted in an emergency and chaos, that leaves them no choice but to step in and fix things by taking control.

They have been using takeovers of blue cities within red states as a testing ground for this kind of thing since Trump's first term.

Once again, fuck Fetterman! He is a wolf barely concealed in sheep's clothing. I hope people recognize this not as a betrayal to the Democratic party, but to the United States.

Definitely wouldn't be the first time for him.

Here's another recent and very blatant example regarding the ban on state AI regulations