|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On Mon, 03 May 2010 15:34:18 -0700, Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Well, as the same person explained it, when he said he was **not** going
> to enforce the law, was, "Before this, if we found someone we felt was
> likely to be illegal, we handed them over to the border patrol (I assume
> this means the Mexican one), now they want me to put them in jail, waste
> tax payers money figuring out if we need to do something *then* turn
> them over to the same people. And, if I don't, I can be sued?"
Handing over to border patrol would be the US Border Patrol, not the
Mexican border patrol. That's part of US Immigrations & Customs.
At least that's my understanding. But he raises a good point; the
analysis of the case I've read, though, talks about specific
constitutional violations (more than just the 4th, as I recall).
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |