Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

You read that correctly. A guy got turned over to ICE by police and sued the city for violating the sanctuary law. He is now set to be given $190k.

San Francisco to pay $190K for sanctuary violation

Well, they did violate their own laws...

Lol yeah. It's just hilarious though. We're giving an illegal immigrant money because the cops handed him over and didn't allow him to continue getting away with the crime of being here illegally. That is how far we've fallen as a country.

So much for soverign immunity.

Originally posted by Surtur
Lol yeah. It's just hilarious though. We're giving an illegal immigrant money because the cops handed him over and didn't allow him to continue getting away with the crime of being here illegally. That is how far we've fallen as a country.

The rise of personal injury lawsuits against local government opens the door to stuff like this.

Technically, they did cause personal damages by ignoring their own laws (Missed work, pain and suffering to his kid and family, ect). Some ambulance chaser probably caught wind of this, and thought "Cha-CHING". And if not, hey, it was worth publicity.

Originally posted by Surtur
Lol yeah. It's just hilarious though. We're giving an illegal immigrant money because the cops handed him over and didn't allow him to continue getting away with the crime of being here illegally. That is how far we've fallen as a country.

This post reveals a great deal about your thinking and line of reasoning and it's pretty sad that partisan politics, fear, propaganda and the "us vs. them" mentality has so many citizens thinking like this. That this incident is what you define as "that is how far we've fallen as a country'.

I skimmed the article but from my understanding they failed to follow proper procedure and are being held accountable. This may seem ridiculous to you, especially as it's an 'illegal immigrant' but if you take a step back, you need to understand why this is important that this accountability is held up: (1) Breaking the law, to get to those we consider 'undesirable' is never okay and (2) The letter of the law must obeyed by those in power to keep them in check. Depending on your heritage, a few decades ago you and your family could have been considered 'undesirable immigrants'.

Disclaimer: This isn't directed at you in particular but my own thoughts jumbled together from what I've observed recently.

This is no better than extreme 'liberals' arguing that 'hate speech' should be banned. Ya, they're disgusting assholes that should be shunned but the freedom of speech exists for a reason. 60 years ago, people were shunning those protesting for civil rights and segregation as it was 'against the norm'; laws like this exist not so that ignorant assholes have a medium to vent their frustration and small penis syndrome, but so that the average citizen has the right to stand up for what they believe in. Or 20 years from now, the government could label anything anti-government as hate speech and have them arrested.

People are so terrified nowadays it saddens me. All this fear of 'immigrants, terrorists, undesirables, republicans, democrats, average white male' etc. that I see people using to justify treating others pretty terribly. It's ridiculous, reactionary and short-sighted.

For example: The anti-immigration/Mexican/bullshit policy under the new administration. Did you know that there is a serious shortage of skilled laborers in the agricultural belt right now? Workers of a Mexican background are terrified of showing up for work right now, even legal ones in fear of getting shipped off for being Mexican. And surprise, surprise, there's isn't a line of skilled "American" (See: Caucasian) waiting to take on the role. This is significantly driving up wages (Which is the only good thing to come out of this as they were getting paid a horrible wage and being abused) to motivate them to show up. Of course, the price is going to be shifted to the consumer, so from what I've read, if this continues, you can see a significant increase in the basic food necessities we take for granted.

I'm sorry, but No. That is a No with a capital N. I do not care what bullshit you spout. Paying this shithead nearly 200k because we didn't let him stay here illegally makes us all look like dumb pieces of shit. Makes our government look crazy, and just all around we are rewarding some shithead for being illegal. Tax payer money is going to an illegal. For being turned in by the cops. You know what? I wish California would leave the USA.

Full stop, there is No excuse for this.

Breaking the law to get illegals is never okay, but breaking the law to come here illegally is okay? Cuz that kinda sounds weird. Why do people from outside our country get more leeway with being criminals? Did you know Kate Steinle's family couldn't sue the city over her death, but this shithead was able to sue for being turned into ICE?

The truly pathetic thing? Leftists will see this as a good thing.

i bet he was contributing to our economy through his labor, unlike some leeches. hope he donates all his money to antifa, just to piss you off.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
This is no better than extreme 'liberals' arguing that 'hate speech' should be banned. Ya, they're disgusting assholes that should be shunned but the freedom of speech exists for a reason. 60 years ago, people were shunning those protesting for civil rights and segregation as it was 'against the norm'; laws like this exist not so that ignorant assholes have a medium to vent their frustration and small penis syndrome, but so that the average citizen has the right to stand up for what they believe in. Or 20 years from now, the government could label anything anti-government as hate speech and have them arrested.

As somebody who thinks Trump's immigration policy is retarded (though less retarded than Europe's), this is a terrible false equivalency. Freedom of speech is a basic and very fundamental right central to personal expression, ideological development, and government criticism. The protection of those who illegally immigrate here from the legal consequences of breaking federal law debatably shouldn't be a thing, much less be on the same level as such a fundamental right as freedom of speech.

I do appreciate that you recognize that speech policing is inherently illiberal however. Many are too quick to legitimately claim that censorship is liberal.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
i bet he was contributing to our economy through his labor, unlike some leeches. hope he donates all his money to antifa, just to piss you off.

Whatever way you have to make this seem like it isn't stupid bullshit? You go right ahead.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
This post reveals a great deal about your thinking and line of reasoning and it's pretty sad that partisan politics, fear, propaganda and the "us vs. them" mentality has so many citizens thinking like this. That this incident is what you define as "that is how far we've fallen as a country'.

I skimmed the article but from my understanding they failed to follow proper procedure and are being held accountable. This may seem ridiculous to you, especially as it's an 'illegal immigrant' but if you take a step back, you need to understand why this is important that this accountability is held up: (1) Breaking the law, to get to those we consider 'undesirable' is never okay and (2) The letter of the law must obeyed by those in power to keep them in check. Depending on your heritage, a few decades ago you and your family could have been considered 'undesirable immigrants'.

Disclaimer: This isn't directed at you in particular but my own thoughts jumbled together from what I've observed recently.

This is no better than extreme 'liberals' arguing that 'hate speech' should be banned. Ya, they're disgusting assholes that should be shunned but the freedom of speech exists for a reason. 60 years ago, people were shunning those protesting for civil rights and segregation as it was 'against the norm'; laws like this exist not so that ignorant assholes have a medium to vent their frustration and small penis syndrome, but so that the average citizen has the right to stand up for what they believe in. Or 20 years from now, the government could label anything anti-government as hate speech and have them arrested.

People are so terrified nowadays it saddens me. All this fear of 'immigrants, terrorists, undesirables, republicans, democrats, average white male' etc. that I see people using to justify treating others pretty terribly. It's ridiculous, reactionary and short-sighted.

For example: The anti-immigration/Mexican/bullshit policy under the new administration. Did you know that there is a serious shortage of skilled laborers in the agricultural belt right now? Workers of a Mexican background are terrified of showing up for work right now, even legal ones in fear of getting shipped off for being Mexican. And surprise, surprise, there's isn't a line of skilled "American" (See: Caucasian) waiting to take on the role. This is significantly driving up wages (Which is the only good thing to come out of this as they were getting paid a horrible wage and being abused) to motivate them to show up. Of course, the price is going to be shifted to the consumer, so from what I've read, if this continues, you can see a significant increase in the basic food necessities we take for granted.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
As somebody who thinks Trump's immigration policy is retarded (though less retarded than Europe's), this is a terrible false equivalency. Freedom of speech is a basic and very fundamental right central to personal expression, ideological development, and government criticism. The protection of those who illegally immigrate here from the legal consequences of breaking federal law debatably shouldn't be a thing, much less be on the same level as such a fundamental right as freedom of speech.

I do appreciate that you recognize that speech policing is inherently illiberal however. Many are too quick to legitimately claim that censorship is liberal.

Also the fact is a lot of "hate speech" isn't actually hate speech. Even the Southern Poverty Law Center that people here have tried to hold up have labeled groups that merely support anti-immigration laws as "hate groups".

Hate speech is vague, whereas being here illegally isn't vague.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
i bet he was contributing to our economy through his labor, unlike some leeches. hope he donates all his money to antifa, just to piss you off.

That same labor he wasn't paying taxes on? Yeah, right lol.

Wage taxes, no. Assuming he was living, he would have paid sales taxes on goods and commodities with money he at least earned by working. That's a step up from being a lazy parasite on the tax payers' teat.

With 190k dollars that far overshadows any single amount of junk food/water bottles to give to mojados. Quite the step up the food chain

California will reap the rewards.

Originally posted by Robtard
Wage taxes, no. Assuming he was living, he would have paid sales taxes on goods and commodities with money he at least earned by working. That's a step up from being a lazy parasite on the tax payers' teat.

Shouldn't we expect more from citizens than to be a step up from a "lazy parasite" as you call it?

Originally posted by carthage
With 190k dollars that far overshadows any single amount of junk food/water bottles to give to mojados. Quite the step up the food chain

California will reap the rewards.

I wondering who the cops were that turned them in, they must not have drank as much kool aid as the others.

Originally posted by carthage
With 190k dollars that far overshadows any single amount of junk food/water bottles to give to mojados. Quite the step up the food chain

California will reap the rewards.

Authorities should have followed proper protocols, just because someone is illegal; it doesn't mean they have less rights than animals. Hopefully these same people will next time do a better job and deport people properly.

Meh, California's economy is stronger than most other countries. 190k loss to the state isn't even noticeable.

Originally posted by Robtard
Wage taxes, no. Assuming he was living, he would have paid sales taxes on goods and commodities with money he at least earned by working. That's a step up from being a lazy parasite on the tax payers' teat.

Very true.


https://www.quora.com/Can-an-illegal-immigrant-in-the-US-sue-a-US-citizen



Pretty much, anybody can sue anyone about anything. Soverign immunity used to make this impossible against the government, until a precedent was set for recouping after their ****ups (Such as harming someone in the process of not obeying their own laws.)

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, and don't pretend to be an expert on the subject.

Originally posted by Surtur
I wondering who the cops were that turned them in, they must not have drank as much kool aid as the others.

So now it's a bad thing for authorities to report improper conduct of other authorities because there was an illegal involved? LoLz, your hatred of illegals has you speaking like a proper fascist. Eh, maybe the margarine of fascism.

Originally posted by carthage
That same labor he wasn't paying taxes on? Yeah, right lol.

you'll broaden your over-simplistic economic view when you're paying ridiculous prices for your produce.

Originally posted by Robtard
Authorities should have followed proper protocols, just because someone is illegal; it doesn't mean they have less rights than animals. Hopefully these same people will next time do a better job and deport people properly.

Meh, California's economy is stronger than most other counties. 190k loss to the state isn't even noticeable.

Indeed.

And there's a LOT of undocumented labor there, so the state itself has an interest in keeping confidence in their police forces high..

Not an argument for or against the topic, just stating a fact (Of particular interest to me, is how one minority hollywood blogger gave some insight into just how big certain undocumented populations really are. Went on to claim blacks (He himself is black) may be discriminated against to an extent, but that's nowhere near comparable to how latino's are overlooked almost entirely by hollywood, given their disproportionate numbers in the area..)

cdtm,

As far as your lawsuit question, an illegal person can file a lawsuit if their rights have been violated. As much as some people would like that illegals had no rights, they too are constitutionally protected.

Originally posted by Robtard
So now it's a bad thing for authorities to report improper conduct of other authorities because there was an illegal involved? LoLz, your hatred of illegals has you speaking like a proper fascist. Eh, maybe the margarine of fascism.

Yes, because we've been told it's a bad thing for ICE to get called on non-violent illegals. Even in places without specific sanctuary laws.

So I ask the same to you, in all the states that lack this law: it's not a bad thing for them to enforce immigration laws, right? Though even if you don't believe it's bad, most of your fellow libbies do believe it is bad.

It can't be both, it's an all or nothing thing. If we're going to shrug and go "Well rules are rules" then okay, we apply that all across the board.

Originally posted by cdtm
Pretty much, anybody can sue anyone about anything.

Interesting. Kate Steinle's family...they can sue the city then, right?

I'm just messing with you, I asked you a question I already know the answer to: no, the answer is no, they were told they could not do so, by a judge.

Makes this country look ass backwards, but I'm glad people are now sticklers for immigration laws. I am looking forward to this being practiced in the future.

Originally posted by Surtur
Yes, because we've been told it's a bad thing for ICE to get called on non-violent illegals. Even in places without specific sanctuary laws.

So I ask the same to you, in all the states that lack this law: it's not a bad thing for them to enforce immigration laws, right? Though even if you don't believe it's bad, most of your fellow libbies do believe it is bad.

It can't be both, it's an all or nothing thing. If we're going to shrug and go "Well rules are rules" then okay, we apply that all across the board.

You're just ranting now and trying to confuse the situation.

The facts are, the authorities here didn't do things by the book so they're getting dinged for it as even illegals have human rights. (yes, that bothers you).

Originally posted by Robtard
You're just ranting now and trying to confuse the situation.

The facts are, the authorities here didn't do things by the book so they're getting dinged for it as even illegals have human rights. (yes, that bothers you).

What I'm saying is if they are going to be sticklers for immigration laws then I am all on board. I can't wait to see them encouraging others to respect our immigration laws.

Now we will have some peace and quiet and the people of California will not be whining about immigration laws being enforced. They should be very enthused by this, they finally take immigration laws seriously.

Honestly, do you even know what you're complaining about anymore?

Because you initially made this thread to whine about how some illegal was allowed to sue because his rights were violated and the idea of an illegal having rights is anathema to you. Do you need another redo? I'll let you have it, if you ask nicely.

Originally posted by Surtur
Interesting. Kate Steinle's family...they can sue the city then, right?

I'm just messing with you, I asked you a question I already know the answer to: no, the answer is no, they were told they could not do so, by a judge.

Makes this country look ass backwards, but I'm glad people are now sticklers for immigration laws. I am looking forward to this being practiced in the future.

Was talking in a general sense. A judge is basically the gatekeeper to a lawsuit being successfully claimed, and cities/governments are still harder to go after then a private citizen.

And in that casen the city isn't responsible for the actions of former cons.

At least, by the judge's logic. He allows that lawsuit, and suddenly everyone who's ever been harmed by a felon will sue cities.

Remember too, that police officers are under no obligation to protect citizens, even if they're right there while someone's getting mugged. The standard governmemt defense against lawsuits is that basically no obligation to the public beyond "Don't shoot them/ruin their lives by a massive ****up".

Originally posted by Robtard
Honestly, do you even know what you're complaining about anymore?

Because you initially made this thread to whine about how some illegal was allowed to sue because his rights were violated and the idea of an illegal having rights is anathema to you. Do you need another redo? I'll let you have it, if you ask nicely.

Lol@ you thinking you allow anything to happen. Keep up that sense of humor Rob, it will serve you well.

If that's what you need to cope with yet another silly situation you've gotten yourself in, cool, buddy.

Originally posted by Robtard
If that's what you need to cope with yet another silly situation you've gotten yourself in, cool, buddy.

You keep telling yourself that pal.

I feel a bit better knowing this country isn't sad enough to give millions of dollars to someone who killed an American soldier.

This country isn't sad enough, Canada? Can't make the claim unfortunately.