The city of Laguna Niguel, California, issued a press release on April 17, informing the public that the Laguna Niguel City Council had voted unanimously to condemn California Senate Bill 54, “which conflicts with Federal Law and the U.S. Constitution.”
SB 54, also known as the California Values Act, prohibits state and local agencies from enforcing immigration laws or working with immigration enforcement agencies.
The release stated that Laguna Niguel also unanimously voted to join the County of Orange and several other Orange County cities (at no cost to the taxpayers) in an amicus brief challenging the constitutionality of SB 54.
The release continued by saying:
Senate Bill 54, which was passed by the California State Legislature and signed into law by Governor Brown, prohibits Laguna Niguel’s law enforcement officers from working collaboratively with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency when a non-U.S. citizen is arrested for a serious felony such as domestic violence, assault or even homicide. The impact of the state’s new law could result in the release of accused criminals back into the community rather than turning them over to ICE for consideration of deportation.
{modulepos inner_text_ad}
“In Laguna Niguel our top priority is public safety,” the release stated, quoting Laguna Niguel Mayor Elaine Gennawey. “We support our police officers and the rule of law. We welcome immigrants of every race and creed. We are a compassionate community, but we will not take away our local police officers’ ability to work collaboratively with other law enforcement agencies to further protect the public safety of our residents. ‘Siloing’ law enforcement and limiting communications between public safety agencies can put our residents at risk.”
The Business Dictionary defines “Silo mentality” as: “A mind-set present in some companies when certain departments or sectors do not wish to share information with others in the same company. This type of mentality will reduce the efficiency of the overall operation, reduce morale, and may contribute to the demise of a productive company culture.”
The city’s press release also noted another reason why Laguna Niguel should not comply with California’s sanctuary law:
Additionally, the City is required to comply with Federal law to receive Federal grants. If the City were to ignore the Federal government’s authority to enforce immigration law, community services for the disabled, elderly and at-risk homeless residents as well as street improvement projects could lose the federal funding that keeps those important programs viable.
The New American has published several articles recently about other cities in Orange County, as well as the county Board of Supervisors, that have either passed anti-sanctuary resolutions or have joined the federal lawsuit by the Trump administration against the state’s sanctuary laws. The Riverside County cities of Beaumont and Murrieta are also considering taking official stances against the state’s sanctuary laws, and the San Diego County Board of Supervisors is also considering joining the administration’s lawsuit against the state of California.
Image: Advertisement on Laguna Niguel website
Related articles:
Orange County Joins Lawsuit Against California’s Sanctuary Status
California City Votes for Second Time to Exempt Itself From State’s Sanctuary Law
California City May Exempt Itself From State’s Sanctuary Law
Trump DOJ Sues California Over Its Immigration and Sanctuary Policies
President Trump Thinking About Pulling ICE Agents Out of California
California to Punish Businesses That Cooperate With Feds on Immigration
Governor Brown Signs Bill to Make California a Sanctuary State
ICE Acting Director: California Sanctuary State Law Will Force “At-large” Arrests
Trump DOJ Demands Documents From “Sanctuary” Jurisdictions
Sessions and DOJ Give Sanctuary Cities “Last Chance” to Comply
Trump, Sessions Increase Pressure on Sanctuary Cities
Sanctuary Cities: an Invitation for Criminals
ICE Acting Director: California Sanctuary State Law Will Force “At-large” Arrests
