L.A's "Special Order 40" Passes Muster With State Appellate Court

A Judicial Watch lawsuit I wrote about in Reason magazine back when it was filed in 2007, intended to overturn the eminently sensible L.A.P.D. "Special Order 40," which bars L.A. police officers from investigating immigration status in their normal dealings with citizens (and crooks…), lost in the California Court of Appeals.

I wrote about this at greater length at my L.A. news and politics blog "City of Angles" at KCET.org

Comments

[Mister DNA]

A preemptive Shut The Fuck Up, LoneWacko.

[bigbigloneSlacker]

This is typical of Reason.com-type Libertarians who want our country to be over-run by IllegalMexican criminals who would like to rape our sons and daughters.

Hey everybody, come read my blog...

[Fascitis Necrotizante]

[stands in front of mirror with eyes closed]

Lonewacko...
Lonewacko...
Lonewacko...

[Warren]

The government passing up the opportunity to make things more shitty, is well worth celebrating! I totally resent that I have to celebrate things not getting shittier.

[Peter]

This is typical of Reason.com-type Libertarians who want our country to be over-run by IllegalMexican criminals who would like to rape our sons and daughters.

Ugly kids need lovin' too!

[Episiarch]

"If you blog it, he will come."

[SpongePaul]

That is the right way to look at it, the courts got it right. the lapd or any cities pd is charged with enforcing the laws of the city, the county cops with the county state cops with the state and feds with the fed laws. the court had already ruled that cali local cops did not have to enforce the federal drug laws, as it is legal where they enforce and they MUST follow state/city/county law. it is the job of ICE to deal with aliens.

[Terry]

Brian, why do you blog at KCET?
I just looked at it and you have 2 comments on only one post and one comment on the rest.
I didn't look at them, probably you.
But you get what you get paid for, nothing at KCET.
So stop blogging there because if you blog and no one reads are you blogging? NO.

BTW: Where is your next public appearance in LA? I got your books, Burning and Capitalists, and want to get one or both autographed.
thanks

[brotherben]

Peter, a bootyliscious latina can jump my ass any times she wants. I don't give a rat's ass if she's legal or a criminal.

[R C Dean]

brotherben, I'm assuming when you say you don't care if she's legal, you are not referring to said bootylicious latina's age.

[brotherben]

R C Dean, I was speaking of her immigration staus. I have no interest in underage partners.

[Xeones]

Shut the fuck up, LoneWacko, wherever you are.

[Warty]

P.S.: Any replies to this post will likely consist of ad homs, thereby conceding my points and exposing libertarians for the cowardly, childish anti-intellectuals they are.

[Elemenope]

Man, it really is something when your name becomes a punchline when you don't even show up.

[24AheadDotCom]

What can I say? Reason continues strongly supporting IllegalImmigration despite its obvious hugely negative impacts not just on California as a whole but on L.A. in particular. Reason is supporting lawlessness and is trying to tie the hands of police officers who could have dangerous felons who shouldn't even be here in the first place deported. And, all of that has a cost that's borne by the citizens but not by those who profit from the scheme.

Not only is Reason supporting massive illegal activity, but they're supporting a MassiveSubsidy to crooked businesses.

And, not only are they supporting criminality and MassiveSubsidies, but they're supporting giving even more power to the far-left. The far-left then uses that power to push for more spending.

If you disagree, think this through and figure out the actual bottom line impact of what Reason supports.

P.S. Here are some answers to amnesty talking points. No doubt you've seen some of those talking points from Reason; that page links to explanations of why they're wrong.

[Isaac Bartram]

Man, it really is something when your name becomes a punchline when you don't even show up.

Yanno, one of these days lonewhacko won't show up, and we'll all be left not knowing if he just got the message or if the MexicanGovernmentLaRaza overlords have decided he's gotten too close to discovering TheTruth.

[Paul]

What about Special Order 420?

[Tulpa]

Looks like the disclaimer is gone, so you can ad hom with impunity, anti-intellectuals.

[Brett Stevens]

And we all know how well unfettered immigration has worked in the past.

[B]

I would love to hear an explanation as to why it is such a horrible thing if the police investigate the immigration status of someone who has been arrested. I can understand not investigating someone if no arrest has been made, but the insistence that someone who has been arrested is somehow being persecuted if the police take two fucking seconds to check his immigration status is pure bullshit, and is an example of "look how libertarian I am" preening that has serious negative consequences. Of course, when the people on this site are making the assumption that anyone who opposes the breaking of American law is some sort of bigot, it is kind of hard to engage in any sort of reasonable debate, regardless of how much data you provide concerning how illegals drive down wages, bankrupt border hospitals, commit a multitude of crimes, and are a massive drain on social services of various localities. In the state of California, it is estimated that illegals cost the state at least $5 Billion a year; it should be obvious to anyone with a brain that this is a major reason for California's current fiscal situation, and anyone who claims otherwise is, frankly, full of shit.

[B]

"P.S.: Any replies to this post will likely consist of ad homs..."

As I stated in my above post, the majority of people on this site, including those who run it, in my experience, believe anyone who opposes the violation of Federal Immigration law is a bigot. Some editors, Kerry Howley comes to mind immediately, have no hesitation in labelling those with genuine concerns about illegal immigration racists. In their minds the serious negative consequences that have been documented countless times are all a bunch of bullshit cooked up by those perpetrating some sort of "brown scare", to use their term. Debating illegal immigration on this site in good faith is next to impossible. You would be better off trying to convince MNG that Israel has a right to exist.

[MikeP]

And we all know how well unfettered immigration has worked in the past.

No doubt! For example, look at the unbridled hellhole the US was for its first century and a half.

[MikeP]

regardless of how much data you provide concerning how illegals drive down wages,

Data, please?

bankrupt border hospitals,

Name one.

commit a multitude of crimes,

Cite?

and are a massive drain on social services of various localities. In the state of California, it is estimated that illegals cost the state at least $5 Billion a year

Breakdown? In particular, how much of that is education and health?

[Native American]

And we all know how well unfettered immigration has worked in the past.

No doubt! For example, look at the unbridled hellhole the US was for its first century and a half.

uhhh.....

[MikeP]

Are you saying Ellis Island was run by native Americans?

Or do you just not know the difference between immigration and conquest?

[Abner MacGillicuddy]

"And we all know how well unfettered immigration has worked in the past."

Do we now?

A visit to Herr von Stevens blog reveals that he is a supporter of the British National Party.

Why don't you and LoneWhackof go off for a mutual masturbation session?

[Abner MacGillicuddy]

When I was but a young sprout, me gran would tell me how when she was a wee lass they thought the Irish were going to ruin it for the good Americans what with their cheap labor and their thieving ways.

[Native American]

Or do you just not know the difference between immigration and conquest?

I don't pretend to know as much as some others pretend to know. Little black and white, much gray.

[Isaac Bartram]

Just a technical point, if I'm not mistaken the US is a signatory of a convention which requires that when a foreign national is arrested the authorities are supposed to contact his consulate as soon as possible.

"Special Order 40" would seem to be at odds with that since it would seem that some effoort to determine the nationality of arrestees is required.

[StupdendousMan]

Since there are obviously many illegal immigrants in California it makes sense for the police to check status when someone is arrested.

If charged they provide no tax revenue to a failing state. There is no reason to keep them in the US.

[links of london Necklace]

It was a very nice idea! Just wanna say thank you for the information you have shared. Just continue writing this kind of post. I will be your loyal reader. Thanks again.

[wow gold us]

Good!