“Nina Perales, an attorney with the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, said the law [SB4, Texas anti-sanctuary cities law] was a “constitutional train wreck” that tries to coerce local law enforcement officers to do the job of federal immigration authorities,” reported the Dallas Morning News.
One does have to be careful in arguing with insanity because you can end up looking insane yourself but, given that MALDEF and Perales are making these arguments before a friendly judge in federal court in challenging SB4, the comment does merit response.
Perales says SB4 “tries to coerce local law enforcement officers to do the job of federal immigration authorities” and yet nowhere in the statute is there anything which adds any new duty to Texas peace officers and certainly nothing that suggests, asks, or requires a peace officer to “do the job of federal immigration authorities.”
SB4 simply prevents local government jurisdictions from changing the way things are by adopting policies which prevent, not the enforcement of immigration law, but cooperation with federal law enforcement authorities when it comes to immigration. The Act does require jails and agencies to cooperate with federal authorities but that is all. There is no taking on of immigration enforcement duty or authority by Texas agencies or peace officers.
Perales, a leftwing front group lawyer, must know her statement is a false representation of what SB4 does and doesn’t do in Texas. Given this, we can conclude that her statement and most of the others given to the press are designed to inflame passions of those who are ignorant of the facts but emotionally or politically concerned with the issue.
It’s a shame that reporters for the Dallas Morning News and other outlets don’t follow-up such wild statements with the question of “where in the statute does it have Texas police performing immigration duties?” but, we don’t get such and you’d be foolish to hold your breath waiting for it.
Sanctuary city ban disinformation and an unquestioning press
Robert Pratt
“Nina Perales, an attorney with the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, said the law [SB4, Texas anti-sanctuary cities law] was a “constitutional train wreck” that tries to coerce local law enforcement officers to do the job of federal immigration authorities,” reported the Dallas Morning News.
One does have to be careful in arguing with insanity because you can end up looking insane yourself but, given that MALDEF and Perales are making these arguments before a friendly judge in federal court in challenging SB4, the comment does merit response.
Perales says SB4 “tries to coerce local law enforcement officers to do the job of federal immigration authorities” and yet nowhere in the statute is there anything which adds any new duty to Texas peace officers and certainly nothing that suggests, asks, or requires a peace officer to “do the job of federal immigration authorities.”
SB4 simply prevents local government jurisdictions from changing the way things are by adopting policies which prevent, not the enforcement of immigration law, but cooperation with federal law enforcement authorities when it comes to immigration. The Act does require jails and agencies to cooperate with federal authorities but that is all. There is no taking on of immigration enforcement duty or authority by Texas agencies or peace officers.
Perales, a leftwing front group lawyer, must know her statement is a false representation of what SB4 does and doesn’t do in Texas. Given this, we can conclude that her statement and most of the others given to the press are designed to inflame passions of those who are ignorant of the facts but emotionally or politically concerned with the issue.
It’s a shame that reporters for the Dallas Morning News and other outlets don’t follow-up such wild statements with the question of “where in the statute does it have Texas police performing immigration duties?” but, we don’t get such and you’d be foolish to hold your breath waiting for it.