California Prepares to Become a Sanctuary State

by Jack

In defiance of President Trump’s wish to give America a secure border in order to safely regulate the flow of immigration from our Southern border, California democrats are pushing to make CA an official sanctuary state.  

“California legislators are gearing up to make California a “sanctuary state” for all illegal aliens, according to a report by CBS’s Los Angeles affiliate — even though California already is one.”

Democrat lawmakers claim the new bill is designed to protect illegal aliens from any attempt to enforce federal immigration law by President Donald Trump.

SB54, authored by Senate pro Tem Kevin De Léon (D-Los Angeles) and Sen. Richard Pan (D-Sacramento), is scheduled to be heard in the State Senate’s Public Safety Committee this morning.

According to Senator De Léon’s website, SB54 (along with two other bills designed to provide state funds for legal defense for anyone ordered deported) is to be known as “Protecting California’s People and Prosperity Against Immigration Enforcement Overreach.”  De Leon has ordered these measures “to prevent the use of state and local resources, including personnel, for immigration enforcement; and the creation of a federal registry” fast-tracked, meaning the normal schedule of hearings that can take weeks will be compressed into less than a week.”  End

California  was taken over by ultra-liberal democrats years ago and it’s been a downhill spiral ever since.  We (conservatives) have no representation, except for liberal representation.   There is no balance of power here and there is no chance for a dissenting voice or conservative legislation in Sacramento.

This latest legislation by the treasonous democrat, De Leon, might just as well have been written in Mexico City.  It’s not about fairness and families.  It’s about leverage and taking over.  If you go down the list of legislators and look at the Hispanic surnames and see the legislation they have introduced, it clear they never represented the “people” of this state.  They have only represented what was advantageous to Hispanics…that is the blunt and honest truth.

California has been conquered by liberals working in concert with special interest groups. As a result of liberalism, businesses have been leaving the state in record numbers, crime is rampant, ghettos are growing, and in so many ways the state is going under.

Our taxes are at the top of virtually all the state’s and they are still on the rise.  Our overreaching regulations are killing jobs and our cities are suffering from the decay of poverty.

Everywhere you look, we are overrun with bums who have no intention of working or being in any way self supporting.  This is thanks to liberals.  They are coming from all over the US because liberal CA is giving away our wealth and now they are securing their political future by harboring illegals, who also take their portion of our wealth.  The illegals will soon vote and they will change the laws that have served us so well because they are blindly following their benefactors, the liberal democrats.

This is a disaster far worse than any earthquake or Tsunami.  This is the highest product of leftist liberalism.   We’ve lost this part of America to the radicals.  But, if nothing else, CA will serve as the bad example of what dangers await if leftwing liberalism should infect other states as it has CA.



This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

30 Responses to California Prepares to Become a Sanctuary State

  1. Libby says:

    What flow? Illegal immigration has been stagnant essentially since the crash:

    So there is no flow to stem … but there will be, if That Idiot in the Oval Office continues to do and say stupid things that tank our southern neighbor’s economy. Then we will, again, be up to our elbows in “economic migrants”. (You! … who crow over the fall of the peso NEED to think again.)

    The Sanctuary Movement is concerned solely with protecting people who are already here, already working, living peacefully with their families … from the savage policies of a lot of frightened, selfish, greedy, resentful … just nasty … people.

    Please, in the future, refrain from lying about the situation.

    • Tina says:

      “…if That Idiot in the Oval Office continues to do and say stupid things that tank our southern neighbor’s economy.”

      The Mexican economy has done better year over year (1.6% to 2.2% growth), however, the oil glut ensures that Mexico’s dollar will continue to fall in relation to the US dollar. The glut is occurring for several reasons not the least of which is world wide economic stagnation. If anyone is responsible for this it would be Obama, the man who worked tirelessly for eight years to blunt economic growth in America which also has affected the entire world.

      “The Sanctuary Movement is concerned solely with protecting people…”

      Give yourselves a gold star but stop fooling yourselves. It has always been the duty of law enforcement to serve and protect people on the street. it is also the responsibility of law enforcement to deal with criminal elements. What’s the problem with walking and chewing gum at the same time.

      It is INSANE to release criminals back onto our streets but that is exactly what’s been happening. The number was 68,000 in 2013. These criminals are not stupid…they head straight for sanctuary cities. This procedural F.U. does nothing to protect the “people who are already here, already working, living peacefully with their families.” They are as vulnerable as any US citizen. Your argument is crapola. Your argument is an excuse, a cover story for the bad policy under Obama. It’s also more political theater. The truth is, this “movement” is part of the radical left open borders fantasy that is supposed to culminate in single party (iron fist) rule. You “IDIOTS” think a centralized world government built on socialism with open borders will bring world peace.

      “… from the savage policies of a lot of frightened, selfish, greedy, resentful … just nasty … people.”

      Dumb Libby. Letting criminal run free in a safe space is pretty nasty. the one thing that protects people is the rule of law, for which your party has no respect. We are all capable of the things you accuse us of, but it takes a particularly stupid person to think the rule of law can be undermined without sending all of us back to the jungle. Violent “animals” are filling our streets, damaging property, bullying people, and killing people on a regular basis of late…and with encouragement from your leaders.

      And you ask our readers to think of you as the nice caring people? There are no words to describe this situation…none.

      • Libby says:

        “The Mexican economy has done better year over year (1.6% to 2.2% growth)….” due, in no small part, to NAFTA, which your boy proposes to dismantle. Neither you, nor he, think these things through.

        NAFTA’s implementation in this country was, as usual when Republicans hold the purse strings, done on the cheap. Displaced workers were left to founder … and get really, really pissed. Hence, … The Orange One.

        But the poor things have just shot both feet clean off.

      • Bryan H. says:

        “It has always been the duty of law enforcement to serve and protect people on the street. it is also the responsibility of law enforcement to deal with criminal elements. ”

        I agree with this, but what would you say to cops who say that illegal immigrants are wary to report crimes because they’re afraid of being deported? I can see why some would support sanctuary cities on this practical basis. If illegal immigrants are afraid to go to the police then crimes that could be stopped will instead fester.

        Of course, illegal immigrants already have a lower crime rate (other than the initial crime of entering the country illegally) than the general populace.

        Libby is right to point out the reduction in immigration. More people are going back to Mexico than coming in. I can understand being against illegal immigration, they are breaking our laws, but the idea that this should be a priority in our country right now blows my mind. It’s like if a presidential candidate based the majority of his platform on stopping jaywalking. With all the problems in the world, we’re going to focus our energy and resources on this one? We’re going to spend billions on a giant wall to keep out immigrants when they’re already leaving our country voluntarily? It doesn’t make any sense to me, and it makes me think they’re being used as a scapegoat to distract from real problems.

  2. J. Soden says:

    Buy stock in moving companies as they pack up wage earners and businesses leaving for other states.
    And should Taxifornia secede, TheDonald’s wall can extend along the eastern borders of AZ and NV, and the southern border of OR.

  3. Joe says:

    Yes this is a disaster.

    I blame our corrupt, criminal clown county supervisors.

    Our only hope is the state of Jefferson but our criminal supervisors will not allow a vote on it.

    They don’t want our voices to be heard on this vital subject.

    They want us to be enslaved.

    • Bryan H. says:

      The “State of Jefferson” people are just as dumb as the #Calexit people threatening to secede due to Trump’s election. If you love America then you stay in it and try to make it better. You don’t threaten to leave.

  4. Peggy says:

    Sure wish someone would explain to me the difference between AB-4/TRUST Act Gov. Brown signed into law in 2013 and the current SB-54 bill.

    Gov. Brown signs 9 immigration-related bills:

    October 7, 2013

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. —
    “It’s a shot across the bow for immigration reform. California Gov. Jerry Brown signed nine immigration-related bills in three days.

    One of those, the Trust Act, prohibits local law enforcement agencies from holding people for deportation if they are arrested for a minor crime and would otherwise be eligible to be released.

    “Many immigrants are entering the pipeline of detention and deportation if they’ve been pulled over for a traffic offense, if they are selling tamales on a sidewalk in front of a store. AB4, the Trust Act, basically rights this huge injustice,” said Reshma Samasunder with the California Immigrant Policy Center.

    Assemblyman Tim Donnelly (R-Hesperia) says this law sends the wrong message.
    “You can drive drunk two times before you will be deported under the Trust Act,” said Donnelly. “It basically turns California into a sanctuary state, and the only thing it does that has anything to do with trust is it’s going to break the trust between local law enforcement and federal.”

    On Thursday, the governor approved legislation that allows people who are here illegally to get driver’s licenses.”


    For those of us old enough to remember the first time Moonbeam was our governor this will come as no surprise. Those who aren’t this will be a shocker. You’ll think it has to be a different Jerry Brown, but I assure you they are the same person.

    Flashback: Jerry Brown, Biden and other Dems refused to accept Vietnamese refugees:

    “Some liberal Democrats are fighting back tears when discussing President Donald Trump’s travel ban on Muslims from seven nations.

    But in 1975, leftist Dems went to great lengths to keep Vietnamese refugees (even
    orphans) out of the United States.

    During his first stint as governor, Jerry Brown fought to stop Vietnamese refugees from being delivered to California. /AP

    Trump issued the order, the White House said, so that a better system to vet refugees coming from those nations can be put into place.

    The Democrat complaints in 1975 appeared to center on the fact that the refugees were escaping communism, an ideology, analysts say, liberals did not find that objectionable.

    Leading the effort to ban the Vietnamese refugees was California’s Gov. Jerry Brown. Other prominent Democrats calling for the ban were Delaware’s Sen. Joe Biden, former presidential “peace candidate” George McGovern, and New York Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman.”


  5. Post Scripts says:

    Wow Peggy, you sure found us a great article. Democrats often play both sides hoping they never get caught being hypocrites, but you caught em…thanks Peggy

    • Peggy says:

      Thanks Jack. You’re so right about Dems playing both sides.

      When I discovered AB-4/The TRUST Act over a year ago it reminded me of Obama suing the state of Arizona over their law to help them deal with the illegal immigration problem and the Supreme Court ruling in favor of Obama.

      So we have two states that passed laws; one to enforce federal immigration laws and the other to violate them. Yet, the Obama administration sues the state that enforces the laws and gives a pass to the one that violates them.

      Makes no sense unless you look for an ulterior motive. What could that possibly be?

      Libby’s comment above cracked me up. She just like most of the democrat party are soooo two faced. What Moonbeam did back then was the right thing to do and he was so smart for doing it. He’s now just as bright and smart for doing the exact opposite.

      What also cracks me up is how dumb democrats are for forgetting everything for the past 50 years and more is caught on a recording of one type or another. We not only can read what they said years ago we can see them say it.

      Love what Texas is doing with their sanctuary cities. They’re really living up to the saying of, “Don’t mess with Texas.” Wish Abbot was our governor and our state legislators were as devoted to the US citizens who live here.

      Texas Governor Declares War On Sanctuary Cities, Might Remove Sheriffs Who Refuse To Comply:

      “Texas Gov. Greg Abbott announced that he’s declaring war on sanctuary cities in the state. He made his intentions clear in his State of the State address Tuesday. The first city to refuse to comply with the new directive both from Gov. Abbott and the executive order signed by President Donald Trump is Austin. As a result, Abbott has blocked $1.5 million in grant money to the city since current Sheriff Sally Hernandez said that they would only cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement for illegals caught committing murder, human trafficking, and sexual assault (via AP):

      Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott blocked funding over so-called “sanctuary cities” for the first time Wednesday after Austin’s sheriff said the city’s jails would no longer honor most federal immigration detainers.

      The move begins a crackdown Abbott wants in Texas over criminal suspects who are in the country illegally, which comes as he pushes to sign new laws that could go even further than President Donald Trump’s new executive actions against sanctuary policies.

      Travis County leaders condemned losing $1.5 million in grant money earmarked for crime victim services, courts and other programs. They stood by Sheriff Sally Hernandez, an elected Democrat in Texas’ most liberal city, who announced after Trump’s inauguration that her jails going forward would only honor immigration holds in murder, aggravated sexual assault and human trafficking cases.

      A Travis County judge said that Hernandez’s actions were within the law, but Abbott might go as far as to remove sheriffs who refuse to comply—a threat he made at the end of January:”

  6. Post Scripts says:

    Libby, I want California to remain part of the Union, but I sure would not mind if this state split into two parts and let you and your liberals pal have 70%! But, let us poor conservatives have just 30%, we’ll be fine with that. But, I bet you won’t, I bet your side will go bankrupt. Its heading that direction right now. Only as it is, I don’t want it to take me down too! I would prefer you have that part all to yourselves.

  7. Tina says:

    And when federal funds are withheld they say they just won’t send the money to Washington in the first place. How exactly will they do that? Will Libby and her liberal pals refuse to file their tax returns?

    The Constitution gives the authority for immigration to the federal government, in particular the executive branch. Isn’t that the argument liberals made in Arizona when they were fighting the enforcement of the law?

    Isn’t it interesting that we are (once again) getting great resistance about upholding the law? And liberals making it up as they go along!

  8. Dewey says:

    Good for CA. If we were smart we would convince CA, OR, and WA to beg Canada to take us.

    These Dictators can have the rest. There is no Left.

    There are progressives, Corporate Dems, Establishment Republicans, Dictator Tea party, Libertarians, and Independents

    • Tina says:

      Okay, you got the various associations labeled…now tell us what each stands for and while you’re at it, explain how they are all “the same” as you often state.

      Until you can make distinctions you are just some fool waving flags and tossing rocks…no power.

  9. Dewey says:

    Oh Greens and Pirates too

  10. Libby says:

    “The Constitution gives the authority for immigration to the federal government, in particular the executive branch. Isn’t that the argument liberals made in Arizona when they were fighting the enforcement of the law?

    Indeed. But here’s the thing. In our republic, with our three branches of the government, how it’s supposed to work is the President says: “We need to do THIS about immigration.” And the Congress members (you remember them) and their staff look into the situation, they look at what’s wanted, what’s possible, what’s effective, and what we can afford … and (after much consideration) they make a law ! The President signs the law, and sees to it’s execution.

    But that’s not how it’s been working. There has been no ” what’s wanted, what’s possible, what’s effective, and what we can afford”. There has been only the ill-conceived, short-sighted, knee-jerk (and not even effective) placation of a lot of frightened bigots.

    Not good.

  11. Tina says:

    Libby: “…the Congress members (you remember them)…”

    Oh yeah, Congress. Geez who could forget them?

    But it seems they’ve already weighed-in on this issue:

    In 1952, Congress passed the Immigration and Nationality Act, which expressly authorized the president to suspend the immigration of any person, class of people or group of people into the United States for public health, public safety or national security reasons.

    The courts have upheld this presidential power because under our system, immigration materially affects the nation’s foreign policy and foreign policy is constitutionally the domain of the president — with Congress’ role being limited to the senatorial confirmation of treaties and ambassadors and to authorization of money for the president to spend. …

    … Most people recognize that all people have the natural right to travel, which means they can seek entry here; but the country has accepted the ideas that our borders are not open, that the welfare state here is not without financial limits and that in perilous times such as today, immigration is largely and legally in the hands of the president, whether one has voted for him or not.

    Yet like all governmental powers, particularly those that often clash with natural rights when they are exercised, the power to regulate immigration must be exercised narrowly. Many reading this are here because someone left another country for the freedoms that are respected here. Those freedoms are natural to everyone and will always draw people here.

    The government can only morally and constitutionally interfere with personal freedom for the most compelling of reasons and utilizing the least restrictive means. Is the government faithful to that well-recognized rule? We shall soon see.

    So now the courts will decide if Trumps order overstepped his authority. All is well in the land of DC because, unlike BO and radicals like you, we actually do respect the Constitution, the three branches of government and the process.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.