On Tuesday, Sarah Saldaña, Obama’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) director told lawmakers in a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on criminal alien violence that nothing will be done with sanctuary cities until Congress passes “comprehensive immigration reform.”
The committee first heard from those who have family members killed by illegal immigrants. One being Laura Wilkerson from Texas. Her son, Joshua, was brutally murdered by an illegal five years ago. Mrs. Wilkerson testified that on November 16, 2010 Joshua was “beaten, strangled, tortured until he died. He was tied up, thrown in a field, and set on fire.” Hermilo Moralez was eventually convicted and sentenced to life in prison back in February 2013.
See Page 2:
Where is congress. She is disgraceful. Why don’t congress force the hand of these treasonous communists drmocrats instead of folding and giving in without even trying. Wish I could blink my eyes and the entire democrat population was sent to iran or some other country.
Another one of bozo’s bed partners.You have to know something is wrong with her if she is white and he gave her a good job.
She makes demands? Stupid idiot we already have laws that need to be upheld! Congress should cut all the money to ICE !
Article I, Section 8, Clause 10 of the Cons$#%&!@*ution granted power to Congress to “define and punish . . . Offences against the Law of Nations.” I decided to dig more deeply into the eighteenth century legal sources to determine whether that might include authority over immigration. Sure enough, it turns out that during the Founding Era, restrictions over immigration and emigration comprised a well-recognized branch of the “Law of Nations.” In other words, Congress’s power to “define and punish . . . Offenses against the Law of Nations” included authority to “define” immigration rules and “punish” those who violated them. An explanation appears in latest update of my book, The Original Cons$#%&!@*ution: What It Really Said and Meant .
Why is this cons$#%&!@*utional detective story significant? First, clarifies why the cons$#%&!@*utional text $#%&!@*umes that after 1808 Congress could regulate “Migration” from foreign lands. Second, it clarifies that Congress cannot use the interstate commerce power to bar non-commercial travel within the United States. Third, it knocks one of the props out from under an argument that, however silly, is solemnly advanced by some “liberal” writers – that “commerce” included non-business travel, and therefore that “commerce” also included nearly all other human relationships.
Finally, this story underscores a point I explain for the layperson in The Original Cons$#%&!@*ution: When the Cons$#%&!@*ution is unclear, eighteenth century law offers us valuable trail marks toward the truth……………………………………….http://cons$#%&!@*ution.i2i.org/2010/12/17/does-the-cons$#%&!@*ution-really-give-congress-power-over-immigration/
This man is un American Obama has eroded our country and cons$#%&!@*ution
She needs to spend time in jail.
Let her live in the middle of one.
Thus whole administration is corrupt!!! It must be removed!!!
Another BHO jerk!
Congress should p$#%&!@* a law stating ICE can be sued by any family who lost a loved one to an illegal immigrant.