Newsom threatens DeSantis with kidnapping charges after migrants flown to Sacramento

ThatRobGuy · Jun 6, 2023

Newsom threatens DeSantis with kidnapping charges after migrants flown to Sacramento

Gov. Gavin Newsom threatened Gov. Ron DeSantis with kidnapping charges after South American migrants were flown to Sacramento.

www.latimes.com

SACRAMENTO —
Gov. Gavin Newsom took his feud with Gov. Ron DeSantis to new heights on Monday, seemingly threatening him with kidnapping charges after California officials say South American migrants were sent to Sacramento by the state of Florida

Sixteen migrants from Venezuela and Colombia were transported from Texas to New Mexico and flown on a chartered jet to Sacramento, where they were dropped off Friday at a church, Newsom said.

On Monday, a plane carrying 20 migrants arrived in Sacramento. Both groups were flown by the same contractor and were carrying documents indicating that their transportation involved the state of Florida, according to officials with the California Department of Justice.

I think labelling it as "kidnapping" is a bit of a stretch.

If the US Federal government is allowed to do catch & release style programs and dump people off in red states in a van with no prospects and nowhere to go and that's not called kidnapping...it's even less so for people to flown via private charter jet and dropped off in a city that boasts being a "sanctuary city" and has gone on records as welcoming migrants.

Dirty move by the GOP?, yes.

But is it highlighting the hypocrisy of blue cities that are far removed from the problem?, also yes.

pastmoon · Jun 6, 2023

It is better to be dropped off at a church than be locked up in migrant detention centers operated by the federal government. The current administration actively defends the continued practice of family separations in these facilities:

Biden Justice Dept. defends Trump family separations in court

Despite President Joe Biden's past criticism of the policy, the DOJ stated that the separated families don't have legal standing to sue, angering advocates.

www.nbcnews.com

Nobody should be a pawn in these political games. I think the Christian thing to do is to provide support to immigrants, regardless of their documentation status, and to love them as our neighbors who are most in need. This is supported in the OT and NT.

pastmoon · Jun 6, 2023

pastmoon said:
It is better to be dropped off at a church . . . the Christian thing to do is to provide support to immigrants, regardless of their documentation status, and to love them as our neighbors who are most in need. This is supported in the OT and NT.

It should also be noted that undocumented immigrants from the Americas are generally Christian people:
The Religious Affiliation of U.S. Immigrants: Majority Christian, Rising Share of Other Faiths

Unauthorized immigrants, by contrast, come primarily from Latin America and the Caribbean, and the overwhelming majority of them – an estimated 83% – are Christian. That share is slightly higher than the percentage of Christians in the U.S. population as a whole (estimated at just under 80% of U.S. residents of all ages, as of 2010).

Their creed is not so important to me as their humanity, but it might be something to consider for those who want to see churches that are fuller, not emptier.

DaisyDay · Jun 6, 2023

pastmoon said:
It is better to be dropped off at a church than be locked up in migrant detention centers operated by the federal government. The current administration actively defends the continued practice of family separations in these facilities:

Biden Justice Dept. defends Trump family separations in court

Despite President Joe Biden's past criticism of the policy, the DOJ stated that the separated families don't have legal standing to sue, angering advocates.

www.nbcnews.com

No, you misunderstand. The current administration inherited the lawsuit that originated against the prior administration. It is the lawsuit that is continued, not the practice of family separations.

Nobody should be a pawn in these political games. I think the Christian thing to do is to provide support to immigrants, regardless of their documentation status, and to love them as our neighbors who are most in need. This is supported in the OT and NT.

Agreed.

wing2000 · Jun 6, 2023

ThatRobGuy said:
But is it highlighting the hypocrisy of blue cities that are far removed from the problem?, also yes.

California cities are not far removed from the problem of illegal immigration.

From 2016...but I doubt the patterns have change much...

Most U.S. unauthorized immigrants live in just 20 metro areas

In 2016, the 20 U.S. metro areas with the most unauthorized immigrants were home to 6.5 million of them, or 61% of the estimated total.

www.pewresearch.org

RocksInMyHead · Jun 6, 2023

wing2000 said:
California cities are not far removed from the problem of illegal immigration.

From 2016...but I doubt the patterns have change much...

Most U.S. unauthorized immigrants live in just 20 metro areas

In 2016, the 20 U.S. metro areas with the most unauthorized immigrants were home to 6.5 million of them, or 61% of the estimated total.

www.pewresearch.org

Nor are New York or Washington DC, for that matter (two other popular targets).

ThatRobGuy · Jun 7, 2023

wing2000 said:
California cities are not far removed from the problem of illegal immigration.

From 2016...but I doubt the patterns have change much...

Most U.S. unauthorized immigrants live in just 20 metro areas

In 2016, the 20 U.S. metro areas with the most unauthorized immigrants were home to 6.5 million of them, or 61% of the estimated total.

www.pewresearch.org

A raw headcount isn't the way to look at that.

It stands to reason that major metropolitan area like LA would have more total unauthorized immigrants than a more rural Texas town near the border.

However, the impact isn't the same.

The percentage in comparison to the total population is what's important (when it comes to infrastructure, economics, and resources)

So while the state of New York's undocumented population may be high, it only comprises 3% of their total population, and only 6% of of their K-12 students are kids who's parents are undocumented immigrants.

Compared to Arizona or Texas where the undocumented population comprises a higher percentage of their population, and over 12% of their K-12 students are children of undocumented immigrants.

And if you drill down and look at certain cities in particular, Like Chicago vs. Amarillo, the difference is even more stark.

It takes a bigger percentage Amarillo's resources to accommodate their 15,000 undocumented immigrants than it does for, say, Chicago to accommodate the 200,000 living there when you take into account the public resources and budgets of the two cities respectively.

Amarillo has a $490 million operating budget.
Chicago has an operating budget of $16 Billion.

RocksInMyHead · Jun 7, 2023

ThatRobGuy said:
A raw headcount isn't the way to look at that.

It stands to reason that major metropolitan area like LA would have more total unauthorized immigrants than a more rural Texas town near the border.

However, the impact isn't the same.

The percentage in comparison to the total population is what's important (when it comes to infrastructure, economics, and resources)

So while the state of New York's undocumented population may be high, it only comprises 3% of their total population, and only 6% of of their K-12 students are kids who's parents are undocumented immigrants.

Compared to Arizona or Texas where the undocumented population comprises a higher percentage of their population, and over 12% of their K-12 students are children of undocumented immigrants.

And if you drill down and look at certain cities in particular, Like Chicago vs. Amarillo, the difference is even more stark.

It takes a bigger percentage Amarillo's resources to accommodate their 15,000 undocumented immigrants than it does for, say, Chicago to accommodate the 200,000 living there when you take into account the public resources and budgets of the two cities respectively.

Amarillo has a $490 million operating budget.
Chicago has an operating budget of $16 Billion.

That's true, but it's still inaccurate to declare major cities with significant illegal immigrant populations "far removed from the problem". They are still well-acquainted with it, even if it doesn't have quite the same level of impact on them.

wing2000 · Jun 7, 2023

ThatRobGuy said:
A raw headcount isn't the way to look at that.

It stands to reason that major metropolitan area like LA would have more total unauthorized immigrants than a more rural Texas town near the border.

However, the impact isn't the same.

The percentage in comparison to the total population is what's important (when it comes to infrastructure, economics, and resources)

So while the state of New York's undocumented population may be high, it only comprises 3% of their total population, and only 6% of of their K-12 students are kids who's parents are undocumented immigrants.

Compared to Arizona or Texas where the undocumented population comprises a higher percentage of their population, and over 12% of their K-12 students are children of undocumented immigrants.

And if you drill down and look at certain cities in particular, Like Chicago vs. Amarillo, the difference is even more stark.

It takes a bigger percentage Amarillo's resources to accommodate their 15,000 undocumented immigrants than it does for, say, Chicago to accommodate the 200,000 living there when you take into account the public resources and budgets of the two cities respectively.

Amarillo has a $490 million operating budget.
Chicago has an operating budget of $16 Billion.

Fair point.

Desantis' actions are still juvenile and a waste of the state's resources. His political stunts do nothing to resolve the illegal immigration problem.

ThatRobGuy · Jun 7, 2023

wing2000 said:
Desantis' actions are still juvenile and a waste of the state's resources. His political stunts do nothing to resolve the illegal immigration problem

That part we'd agree on.

I think there's still a better way that one can highlight the hypocrisy of the "New England Elites" (as they see them) without having to engage in these types of stunts.

For instance, Greg Abbott & DeSantis could just as easily stand up a hotline, where mayors of self-proclaimed sanctuary cities can reach them directly and sign up and arrange for the transfers of migrants without preemptively bussing people all over the country and dropping them off out of the blue. And then declare their intent to make public which mayors called them, and the number of people they were willing to offer sanctuary to.

One of two things will happen:
1) The mayors will call and the migrants will have someone who's ready and prepared to take them in (egg in the face of Greg and Ron, but still assists with a problem)
or
2) Nobody calls, and DeSantis and Abbott will be able to publicize the disappointingly low number of contacts if they don't end up calling and still allow them to "dunk on" the people they're looking to "dunk on" without having to bus unaware people around the country (many of whom don't know where they're even going)

There are more tactful ways to put the onus on (or highlight the insincerity of) people who boasted "sanctuary city status" in order to pat themselves on the back, but without having to take it out on the migrants themselves.

None the less, I still think labelling it as "kidnapping" is still a stretch. Letting someone voluntarily get on a charter jet, and sending them to a city that previously declared they'd be happy to take them in isn't the same thing as forcibly tossing someone in the trunk of the car with a blindfold on.

durangodawood · Jun 7, 2023

ThatRobGuy said:
....
I think labelling it as "kidnapping" is a bit of a stretch.
....

I think it depends on the specifics of the statute. But I would guess "kidnapping" wont stick.

Otoh, luring people onto a flight under false pretenses for the purposes of leaving them stranded in some other place... there might be something in "human trafficking" laws that applies. Hopefully there is.

wing2000 · Jun 7, 2023

ThatRobGuy said:
None the less, I still think labelling it as "kidnapping" is still a stretch. Letting someone voluntarily get on a charter jet, and sending them to a city that previously declared they'd be happy to take them in isn't the same thing as forcibly tossing someone in the trunk of the car with a blindfold on.

Yea, I don't agree with Newsom's characterization.

Tinker Grey · Jun 7, 2023

I dunno. If I pick up a kid, drive 50 miles and drop them off somewhere without resources, is it NOT kidnapping because I no longer have them in my possession?

IMO, this hinges on whether the immigrants will testify that they were fooled or not into getting on those planes.

ThatRobGuy · Jun 7, 2023

RocksInMyHead said:
That's true, but it's still inaccurate to declare major cities with significant illegal immigrant populations "far removed from the problem". They are still well-acquainted with it, even if it doesn't have quite the same level of impact on them.

But the impact based on the ratio is the "problem" in this case.

For instance, while both NYC and El Paso are well-acquainted with the concept of illegal immigration, and both understand what kinds of resources are needed in order to accommodate them. Only one of those cities has the "problem" of trying to deal with having undocumented immigrants making up 12% of their total population and trying to run the city on a $500 million budget... while NYC (despite having more total undocumented immigrants), has the luxury of it only comprising 5% of their population, and they've got a $100 Billion to work with.

For instance, if Steve has a ton of money, and rented out a massive venue for a Christmas party originally slated to have 200 people, and you tell him at the last minute you're bringing 3 extra guests, that's hardly even a problem. If Dave was planning on putting on a small Christmas gathering with 10 people, and he was only budgeting $400 for the whole thing, and you tell him you're bringing 3 extra people, it's a much bigger deal.

While Steve and Dave "both know what it's like for someone to bring uninvited guests they weren't anticipating", it only seriously impacts one of them.

To take the analogy a step further... if Steve said 2 months prior "We've got plenty of food, and we'll be happy to welcome anyone who doesn't have anywhere else to go on Christmas", so Dave sends 1 of the 3 uninvited guests down to Steve's place, it's comes off looking pretty bad if Steve tries to make Dave look like the bad guy and starts accusing him of being "cheap".

ThatRobGuy · Jun 7, 2023

durangodawood said:
Otoh, luring people onto a flight under false pretenses

Tinker Grey said:
I dunno. If I pick up a kid, drive 50 miles and drop them off somewhere without resources, is it NOT kidnapping because I no longer have them in my possession?

What are the false pretenses? Did Sacramento's mayor not pledge to take in anyone who needed refuge and offer to find a place for them? (at one point, so much so, that they were hopping on the bandwagon of suing ICE to try to block an EO on immigration)

For the second one, the analogy would be closer to a social worker, who was told that there was a foster kid, and that there was a foster home who officially said they would take them in, so they drop them off at that location based on what the leaders of the supposed "foster home" said their intentions were.

So guess the administration of Sacramento would have to answer for the "no resources" part. As noted earlier, they were "like...so sanctuary" that they were willing to sue the federal government and other states over handling of migrants that they pledged to be a sanctuary city. Yet 36 people was apparently too much for them? Did they mean to pledge to only take in 35 people and accidentally forget to mention that thus causing 36 to be the tipping point?

durangodawood · Jun 7, 2023

ThatRobGuy said:
What are the false pretenses? Did Sacramento's mayor not pledge to take in anyone who needed refuge and offer to find a place for them? (at one point, so much so, that they were hopping on the bandwagon of suing ICE to try to block an EO on immigration)

For the second one, the analogy would be closer to a social worker, who was told that there was a foster kid, and that there was a foster home who officially said they would take them in, so they drop them off at that location based on what the leaders of the supposed "foster home" said their intentions were.

So guess the administration of Sacramento would have to answer for the "no resources" part. As noted earlier, they were "like...so sanctuary" that they were willing to sue the federal government and other states over handling of migrants that they pledged to be a sanctuary city. Yet 36 people was apparently too much for them? Did they mean to pledge to only take in 35 people and accidentally forget to mention that thus causing 36 to be the tipping point?

I heard that the immigrants were told false things to entice them into the caper. We'll see.

essentialsaltes · Sep 27, 2023

DaisyDay said:
The current administration inherited the lawsuit that originated against the prior administration. It is the lawsuit that is continued, not the practice of family separations.

Trump administration officials ordered to testify on family separations

The migrant families’ lawsuits against the government have placed the Biden administration in the awkward position of defending officials involved in a policy that President Biden abhorred.

A federal magistrate judge in California has ordered a pair of top Trump administration officials to testify in a 2021 lawsuit that migrant parents and children filed against the U.S. government for separating them at the southern border.

Magistrate Judge Kandis Westmore on Monday told the Department of Justice and lawyers for migrant families to meet immediately to schedule the depositions of former homeland security secretary Kirstjen Nielsen and ex-attorney general Jeff Sessions.

Sessions and Nielsen also have “unique personal knowledge of their own intent” in making the zero-tolerance policy.

The Trump administration separated more than 3,000 children from their parents along the Mexican border in May and June 2018, the official period of the administration’s “zero tolerance” policy. More than 5,500 children were separated from their parents during Donald Trump’s term as president.

Sessions and Nielsen approved the policy documents that put the separations in motion, records show.

Newsom threatens DeSantis with kidnapping charges after migrants flown to Sacramento

Part of the IT crowd

Member

Member

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State

E pluribus unum

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

Part of the IT crowd

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

E pluribus unum

Part of the IT crowd

re Member

E pluribus unum

Wanderer

Part of the IT crowd

Part of the IT crowd

re Member

Fact-Based Lifeform

Trump administration officials ordered to testify on family separations​

Similar threads

Trump administration officials ordered to testify on family separations