Jose zarate found not guilty of killing Kate Steinle

[Tartarus Sauce]

This will be the Republican rally cry for the next ten years

As it should be

It blows me away that someone can find someone not guilty simply because they share a background as an immigrant

You're retarded. Of course he probably did it. But it's not beyond a doubt that the bullet came from his gun, which is the legal standard.

If the defendant was White, conservative media wouldn't care as much. Very different standard of how they respond to crimes committed by White people compared to immigrants and Muslims. White=isolated incident, illegal/Muslim=part of a trend.

[Tartarus Sauce]

That's how jury's work. Just like when they acquit police officers who kill unarmed black people.

Bullcrap

I don't see what's wrong with what he said. Juries acquit people in what appear to be damning circumstances all the time, especially when the defendants are in a position of authority or power. Not every trial leads to a guilty verdict.

[Tartarus Sauce]

Either way, Zarate should not have been in this country in the first place. A beautiful young life was taken because of him, whether he intended to kill her or not. Time to end sanctuary cities.

This is just an unfortunate situation and the Zarate situation was just an example of one bad apple, but it's no reason to end sanctuary cities. If anything we need to follow the lead of newly elected New Jersey Governor who has promised to make New Jersey a sanctuary state.

There is zero justification for sanctuary cities and a reason they poll poorly

Being a sanctuary city doesn't actually prevent illegals from getting deported, it just means the municipal government has decided not to transform their local law enforcement into devoluted ICE agents. The justification for not enforcing immigration laws at the locals level stems from rather clear rulings from courts that immigration law enforcement is constitutionally the obligation of only the federal government.

The fact that this guy was deported five times should highlight how the federal government still has the authority to deport immigrants in sanctuary cities. The fact he crossed the border five times is an indication that the federal government is really bad at its job of enforcing immigration laws. That's not the fault of "sanctuary cities." Sanctuary cities poll poorly because most people don't understand the law, but the logic for them makes sense from the standpoint of local municipalities.

Some people also don't seem to understand how jury trials work, as evidenced by some of the responses in this thread.

[Tartarus Sauce]

Interesting how liberals here are more focused with the some hyperbolic language by a poster than the fact that a person can be deported five times, illegally obtain a firearm, and 'accidentally' kill an American citizen. That should be the focus.

Uh, maybe because this isn't some rampant f[inks]ing problem going on all across the country on a daily basis? The only reason conservatives are "focused" on it is because the seemingly culpable party is one of the many "Others" that feed their fearmongering.

That's why white guys mowing down tens of thousands of people every year isn't a real issue, but anything with the scent of brown, black, foreign or queer gets their undivided attention.

Or, maybe it's because it shows there's a fundamental error in immigration enforcement that needs to be rectified to prevent things like this from happening again.

Correct, the system is broken.

What seems to trip conservatives up is that instead of actually identifying what the problem is, they use it as an opportunity to rage at liberal cities. The actual problems stem from a longstanding lack of motivation from politicians on both sides of the aisle to voluntarily shut off what has been a steady stream of cheap labor, or the fact that the immigration courts are woefully underfunded and short staffed.

No, instead they want to harangue cities for not channeling limited resources into immigration enforcement, which they have no legal obligation or incentive to uphold anyway.

[Tartarus Sauce]

Either way, Zarate should not have been in this country in the first place. A beautiful young life was taken because of him, whether he intended to kill her or not. Time to end sanctuary cities.

This is just an unfortunate situation and the Zarate situation was just an example of one bad apple, but it's no reason to end sanctuary cities. If anything we need to follow the lead of newly elected New Jersey Governor who has promised to make New Jersey a sanctuary state.

There is zero justification for sanctuary cities and a reason they poll poorly

Being a sanctuary city doesn't actually prevent illegals from getting deported, it just means the municipal government has decided not to transform their local law enforcement into devoluted ICE agents. The justification for not enforcing immigration laws at the locals level stems from rather clear rulings from courts that immigration law enforcement is constitutionally the obligation of only the federal government.

The fact that this guy was deported five times should highlight how the federal government still has the authority to deport immigrants in sanctuary cities. The fact he crossed the border five times is an indication that the federal government is really bad at its job of enforcing immigration laws. That's not the fault of "sanctuary cities." Sanctuary cities poll poorly because most people don't understand the law, but the logic for them makes sense from the standpoint of local municipalities.

Some people also don't seem to understand how jury trials work, as evidenced by some of the responses in this thread.

This is a really good point. I’d add though that critiques of SF’s policy of ignoring ICE retainers are fair, though. Local law enforcement wouldn’t blow off the FBI or DEA. That being said, my understanding is that few “sanctuary” cities do dumb stuff like that.

Retainers don't carry the same legal status as a warrant, and cities are free to ignore them if they wish. Pretty much every city that follows the sanctuary city model, whether publicly declared or not, issues guidelines to local law enforcement about when to accept retainer requests and when to ignore them. Despite the insistence of rabid anti-immigrant types, sanctuary cities don't actually allow undocumented immigrants committing serious felonies to run around the city with impunity and shield them from federal agents. But if they book somebody for say, loitering, and ICE sends out a retainer, they'll probably blow them off.

That isn't to say that a city will always make the right judgement call about whether to respect the retainer request, but it's not this sinister illegal rapist-murderer protection scheme some would like us to believe.