Sanctuary Counties

[Salmon_Run]

If certain cities can become "sanctuary cities" and therefore chose to not acknowledge/enforce laws regarding illegal aliens, then why can't New York counties choose the same status and become "sanctuary counties" and ignore laws regarding the SAFE act?

[rob-c]

Very good question, I wonder if those with legal backgrounds could possibly answer. 

[Robhuntandfish]

heard on radio on my way in that the safe act duex will be passed before the end of the year. 

Edit.....just heard in Jan.  

Edited November 9, 2018 by Robhuntandfish

[sits in trees]

6 hours ago, Salmon_Run said:

If certain cities can become "sanctuary cities" and therefore chose to not acknowledge/enforce laws regarding illegal aliens, then why can't New York counties choose the same status and become "sanctuary counties" and ignore laws regarding the SAFE act?

Give it a go, let us know how you make out.

[moog5050]

Same way states chose to ignore federal marijuana laws.  Enforcement of federal laws by states is a different question that enforcement of state laws by its subordinate counties where state police still patrol, I suspect.

[Salmon_Run]

This comment was made as satire, but look at this:

2 days ago - Madison County, Illinois, voters decided by a 2-to-1 margin Tuesday night that their county should be a gun sanctuary. ... “Shall Madison County become a sanctuary county for law-abiding gun owners to protect them from unconstitutional gun laws passed by the Illinois General

..https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/08/us/illinois-sanctuary-counties-gun-owners-trnd/index.html

 

Edited November 9, 2018 by Salmon_Run
url added

[Robhuntandfish]

isnt there a county in Georgia where you MUST own a firearm? So maybe they could follow that as an example 

  http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/03/10/kennesaw-georgia-requires-every-head-household-own-gun-mayor-discusses-law

Edited November 9, 2018 by Robhuntandfish

[Nomad]

7 hours ago, Salmon_Run said:

ignore laws regarding the SAFE act?

Many individuals do now,  at their own small risk I guess . I don’t know one person who registered their modern sporting rifles or got rid on their standard capacity mags .

Looks like when we go down South this winter , I’ll have to do some shopping .

[jmark]

This is a very good question.  I'm guessing that the 10th Amendment is part of the equation - it limits the right of the federal government vis-a-vis states, to those powers expressly granted by the Constitution.  I have not read the various case law on this, but it certainly comes immediately to mind as relevant.  

I think more relevant is the political realities of the day.  The (current) federal government has tried, in various ways, to force state and local governments to comply with federal immigration law; however, most of these efforts have been shot down by the federal judiciary.  The plaintiffs challenging these efforts have "forum shopped" by bringing their cases in Circuits known to be heavily stacked with liberal judges - namely, anything in the Ninth Circuit (eg, California, Washington, Oregon, Hawaii).  We all know how that has played out.  We do have a rapidly changing federal judiciary, and if the new Senate majority holds I think that will continue.  And we have a "new" US Supreme Court, so we may begin to see some different outcomes in these cases (ultimately). 

On the state level... well, what can ya say?  I recall right after the (un)SAFE Act was passed, some upstate counties said they would not enforce it.  I don't know what the current status of that is on the "street level".  (Does anyone here?)  But here, we obviously have a leftist state government, at not only the executive but now also totally at the legislative level.  As for the courts... the Court of Appeals, our highest court, is made up of seven judges... every single one whom was appointed by King Andrew.  The likelihood of any local or county successfully "opting out" of a state law strikes me as pretty low.  

I do seem to recall some talk at the legislative level about modifying the (un)SAFE Act to state that it only applies to certain downstate counties.  I don't know what ever became of that talk (if anything).  Seems to me it would be worth pursuing in the context of the now-inevitable (un)SAFE Act II.

jm

[ADK Native]

King Cuomo would not stand for firearm sanctuary counties.  Cuomo would probably order martial law with orders to shoot law abiding gun owners on site.

Protect yourselves all you serfs.  Make sure your house is surrounded by GUN FREE ZONE signs and you sanitize your vehicle of any NRA , pro-gun and pro-hunting stickers.  Posting "Cuomo For Dictator" signs and bumper stickers would not hurt either!

[ADK Native]

I would not be surprised by more worthless Cuomo gun control that is useless.  If Cuomo rams more gun control, I believe concurrent to that action he will legalize marijuana for all his mentally ill followers.  This will create a media deflection away for his useless gun control.