For the last eight months, federal authorities have carried out the immigration enforcement agenda of President Donald Trump. Citing the need for public safety, traditional safe spaces that include churches, homeless shelters and courthouses have become targets and anything but safe.
Smuggling immigrants is a business and business is good. However, profitability is coming at the expense of the well-being, if not the lives of smuggler’s “human cargo.”
As more Texas cities line up to fight federal immigration law enforcement, a prominent metropolis to the north is drawing their own line in the fight over sanctuary cities. Another epic battle is brewing, this time with the Windy City’s top elected official.
After the deaths of 10 people in a sweltering truck parked at a San Antonio rest stop, U.S. authorities are more determined than ever to disrupt and dismantle criminal organizations engaged in human trafficking.
If people were asked the meaning of the term 287(g) agreement, they might guess it references some sort of pact between a delinquent taxpayer and the Internal Revenue Service, or even some arcane provision of the Texas Penal Code.
Protesters of Texas’ passed, but yet to be enacted immigration law comes from all walks of life. They gather together to stop a law that one lawyer has referred to as a “constitutional train wreck.”
The river that separates El Paso from Juarez, Mexico serves as a prominent, albeit unique access point for hundreds of people. Every summer, a dry, brown plain replaces the flowing water. Hundreds of people run across the riverbed to enjoy four-minute visits with their loved ones, a practice that skirts the law, but enjoys the approval of border patrol on both sides.
Minors entering the United States without permission must be given a court hearing to determine whether they can be released.
Texas seemed to be facing enough legal hurdles. Four of their largest cities – San Antonio, Austin, Houston and Dallas – are challenging the constitutionality of the famous (or infamous, depending on who you ask) SB4 “sanctuary cities bill.
In spite of immigration law being the purview of the federal government, individual states are dealing with Trump-era immigration matters in their own way. While each have their own approaches and philosophies, no two states can be more on opposite ends of the sanctuary spectrum than California and Texas.