Immigration Watch International (2): NYC Common Sense Caucus proposes legislation to end sanctuary city status amid migrant crisis

Wednesday, June 12, 2024

NYC Common Sense Caucus proposes legislation to end sanctuary city status amid migrant crisis

The Common Sense Caucus, a group of city council members focused on safety and essential services, has introduced the legislation Intro 945, aimed at repealing the statutes that designate New York City as a sanctuary city.

The push from the city council group to revoke sanctuary policies comes at the heels of the migrant crisis and a growing concern over the constraint of local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities, the group made clear in a release last week.

Specifically, the proposed legislation aims to repeal certain sections of New York City’s administrative code that pertain to non-detainment and immigration enforcement policies.

Council Member Robert Holden, who represents D-30, which includes Glendale, Maspeth, Middle Village and parts of Ridgewood, says he has had enough of criminal activity stemming from migrants coming into the city.

“We have enough criminals in this city; we don’t need to import more and protect them as well,” said Holden, who serves as co-chair of the caucus. “Repealing the laws that have created a sanctuary city status is common sense. Those who are wanted for heinous crimes back home or commit crimes in our country should be deported without hesitation. We aim to end this reckless social experiment once and for all.”

Members of the Common Sense Caucus collectively claim the repeal of sanctuary status will enhance law enforcement’s ability to ensure the safety and security of all New Yorkers.

“New York City has always been a safe haven for immigrants seeking better lives, and there have long been policies in place to protect those who follow the rule of law and want to contribute to our great city,” said Minority Leader and co-chair of the caucus Joe Borelli. “But the so-called ‘Sanctuary City’ laws that have been enacted over the past few decades under the single-party rule are a cynical distortion of those policies and have only served to protect dangerous criminals who simply do not belong in our country – and all New Yorkers are paying the price.”

A majority of Republican legislators from all parts of the city have joined this effort, including Council Member Joann Ariola, who represents Southern and Central Queens neighborhoods such as Howard Beach and Ozone Park.

https://qns.com/2024/06/nyc-common-sense-caucus-proposes-legislation-end-sanctuary-city-status-migrant-crisis/

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://awesternheart.blogspot.com.au/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

No comments:

Post a Comment

Background

Postings from Brisbane, Australia by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.) -- former member of the Australia-Soviet Friendship Society, former anarcho-capitalist and former member of the British Conservative party.

Why is "La Raza" the one Spanish term that is NEVER translated in the American mass media? Because translating it would make it a lot less respectable. It means "THE RACE" -- The mixed Hispanic "race" of Mexico. Racism is fine South of the Rio Grande only, apparently.

The "line" of this blog is that immigration should be SELECTIVE. That means that:

1). A national government should be in control of it. The U.S. and U.K. governments are not but the Australian government has shown that the government of a prosperous Western country can be. Up until its loss of office in 2007, the conservative Howard government had all but eliminated illegal immigration. The present Leftist government has however restarted the flow of illegals by repealing many of the Howard government regulations.

2). Selectivity should be based on "the content of a man's character, not on the color of his skin", as MLK said. To expand that a little: Immigrants should only be accepted if they as individuals seem likely to make a positive net contribution to the country. Many "refugees" would fail that test: Muslims and Africans particularly. Educational level should usually be a pretty fair proxy for the individual's likely value to the receiving country. There will, of course, be exceptions but it is nonetheless unlikely that a person who has not successfully completed High School will make a net positive contribution to a modern Western society.

3). Immigrants should be neither barred NOR ACCEPTED solely because they are of some particular ethnic origin. Blacks are vastly more likely to be criminal than are whites or Chinese, for instance, but some whites and some Chinese are criminal. It is the criminality that should matter, not the race.

4). The above ideas are not particularly blue-sky. They roughly describe the policies of the country where I live -- Australia. I am critical of Australian policy only insofar as the "refugee" category for admission is concerned. All governments have tended to admit as refugees many undesirables. It seems to me that more should be required of them before refugees are admitted -- for instance a higher level of education or a business background.

5). Perhaps the most amusing assertion in the immigration debate is that high-income countries like the USA and Britain NEED illegal immigrants to do low-paid menial work. "Who will pick our crops?" (etc.) is the cry. How odd it is then that Australians get all the normal services of a modern economy WITHOUT illegal immigrants! Yes: Before the pandemic, you usually COULD buy a lettuce in Australia for a dollar or thereabouts. And Australia IS a major exporter of primary products.

6). I am a libertarian conservative so I reject the "open door" policy favoured by many libertarians and many Leftists. Both those groups tend to have a love of simplistic generalizations that fail to deal with the complexity of the real world. It seems to me that if a person has the right to say whom he/she will have living with him/her in his/her own house, so a nation has the right to admit to living among them only those individuals whom they choose.

I can be reached on jonjayray@hotmail.com -- or leave a comment on any post. Abusive comments will be deleted.

Immigration Watch International (2)

Wednesday, June 12, 2024

NYC Common Sense Caucus proposes legislation to end sanctuary city status amid migrant crisis

No comments:

Post a Comment

Background

Other blogs

Blog Archive

Contributors