California's Immigration Response

[Shofercia]

In an epic battle between Trump's crazy immigration platform and California's crazy response, there seems to be weirdness and laughter produced. Here's California's response: http://www.scpr.org/news/2017/05/22/721 ... ndlords-f/

The California Assembly has approved a bill to bar landlords from threatening to call immigration authorities on tenants. Lawmakers voted 46-15 to send the bill to the state Senate. The bill is one of two measures introduced by a San Francisco Democrat that would to regulate how landlords and private business owners interact with federal immigration agents.

AB291 by Assemblyman David Chiu would prohibit landlords from disclosing tenants' immigration status. Chiu also authored a measure currently in an Assembly committee to prohibit employers from allowing federal immigration agents into their offices or files without a warrant. Chiu says the measures will protect against mass deportation of immigrants. His bills are among several measures proposed by California lawmakers to thwart President Donald Trump's vow to crack down on illegal immigration.

When you read "San Francisco... Chiu... immigration" you know that it's going to be the crazy antithesis of Trump. San Francisco became infamous for immigration after a violent illegal immigrant felon shot California's sweetheart, Kathryn Steinle, with a gun lost somewhere by a federal agent, and not a single official was prosecuted. http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politics/ ... eath-suit/

LA County, which is saner than SF County, leaves tips for ICE where to find violent illegal immigrant felons, but not illegal immigrants who are also potheads and/or nonviolent dealers of pot. (They deal pot without weapons present and don't work for cartels.)

This law certainly brings up an interesting debate. While some less than savory landlords threaten deportation against illegal immigrant tenants instead of living up to their contractual obligations, some others will be left without a remedy. What if we tell ICE where the violent illegal immigrant felons are, something that's been a policy everywhere except San Francisco? Does that mean that we're criminals?

What if you're running a business, and you don't want to piss off a Federal Agency? What other choice do you have? How many business owners will even know about this law? Would a Federal Agent be required to disclose it?

While illegal immigrant renters, (at least the nonviolent ones,) deserve protection from greedy landlords, like the former owner of the LA Clippers, I think that this bill is extremely broad. But I am curious, what does NSG think? Does any poster dare to offer a bill that could form a compromise on the issue? Why should employers be prohibited from voluntarily cooperating with Federal Agents acting in Good Faith? Are Chiu and Trump both insane, but working on different sides? What about the Steinle case, and how can we avoid such cases in the future? (I think that deporting violent felons and letting the majority of illegal immigrants prosper would prevent future Steinle cases, but that's just my opinion.)

All this and more can be debated in this thread. Just remember: keep it to California and about illegal immigration, and begin!

[Washington Resistance Army]

Doesn't seem very enforceable and is probably just feel good legislation.

[Farnhamia]

The bill adds immigration status to an existing list of things that cannot be used to get you out of your apartment. Taken in context, it's not unreasonable.

[The Two Jerseys]

So California wants to make it illegal to report a crime to the feds?

*slow clap*

[Farnhamia]

So California wants to make it illegal to report a crime to the feds?

*slow clap*

Being in the country without a visa or residency papers is not a crime, it's a civil offense.

[Telconi]

So California wants to make it illegal to report a crime to the feds?

*slow clap*

Being in the country without a visa or residency papers is not a crime, it's a civil offense.

Depends on how it occurs. If you're issued a visa, and overstay, it's a civil offense. However, entering without being processed is a crime (misdemeanor). So in theory, this may not be enforceable if the person committed illegal entry, because reporting a crime cannot be criminalized.

[Kanadorika]

It would be nice if the state focused more effort on the infrastructure that is literally crumbling instead of nonsense like this, but that must be too much to ask.

[Farnhamia]

Being in the country without a visa or residency papers is not a crime, it's a civil offense.

Depends on how it occurs. If you're issued a visa, and overstay, it's a civil offense. However, entering without being processed is a crime (misdemeanor). So in theory, this may not be enforceable if the person committed illegal entry, because reporting a crime cannot be criminalized.

Entering without papers is a criminal offense if you get caught in the act. Once you're in, being in the country without permission is a civil offense. What this does is prevent landlords from using immigration status to pry people out of apartments.

[Farnhamia]

It would be nice if the state focused more effort on the infrastructure that is literally crumbling instead of nonsense like this, but that must be too much to ask.

That costs money and some people in the legislature would probably vote against the state spending money even is the money was going to go to prevent their own houses from sliding into the see. This costs nothing.

[Telconi]

Depends on how it occurs. If you're issued a visa, and overstay, it's a civil offense. However, entering without being processed is a crime (misdemeanor). So in theory, this may not be enforceable if the person committed illegal entry, because reporting a crime cannot be criminalized.

Entering without papers is a criminal offense if you get caught in the act. Once you're in, being in the country without permission is a civil offense. What this does is prevent landlords from using immigration status to pry people out of apartments.

Actually 8 U.S. Code § 1325 (a) (2) defines "eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers" as constituting illegal entry. A person who illegally enters, and is continuing to elude examination or inspection, is still actively violating the law. Also, there is no statute of limitations, so a violation of section 1325 remains an open offense that can be prosecuted at any time so long as the person remains in the United States.

[Shofercia]

The bill adds immigration status to an existing list of things that cannot be used to get you out of your apartment. Taken in context, it's not unreasonable.

Existing law prohibits a lessor from retaliating against a lessee because he or she has lawfully organized or participated in a lessees’ association or an organization advocating lessees’ rights or has lawfully and peaceably exercised any rights under the law by increasing rent, decreasing services, causing a lessee to quit involuntarily, bringing an action to recover possession, or from threatening to do any of those acts.

This bill would provide that a lessor would violate that prohibition if the lessor reported, or threatened to report, the lessee, or individuals known to the lessor to be associated with the lessee, to immigration authorities.

So if the lessee is a lessee union representative, and has an illegal immigrant, who is a violent felon, as an associate, the lessor reporting said violent felon to ICE would be committing a crime. On the other hand, if the lessor does not report the violent felon, and said violent felon commits a violent crime, the lessor could be financially responsible to residents of his complex. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Want to tell me again how that's not over-broad?

If you note, the original text says nothing about anyone being associated with the lessee.

[Shofercia]

Being in the country without a visa or residency papers is not a crime, it's a civil offense.

Depends on how it occurs. If you're issued a visa, and overstay, it's a civil offense. However, entering without being processed is a crime (misdemeanor). So in theory, this may not be enforceable if the person committed illegal entry, because reporting a crime cannot be criminalized.

And if said person entered the border with a weapon, or ran a weapon or people trade, then it could be a felony.

Depends on how it occurs. If you're issued a visa, and overstay, it's a civil offense. However, entering without being processed is a crime (misdemeanor). So in theory, this may not be enforceable if the person committed illegal entry, because reporting a crime cannot be criminalized.

Entering without papers is a criminal offense if you get caught in the act. Once you're in, being in the country without permission is a civil offense. What this does is prevent landlords from using immigration status to pry people out of apartments.

And that's perfectly fine. If that's all that the law did, I wouldn't have any issues with it. Most of our landlords are nice, but we do have dicks, who need to be taught some manners. So if that's all the law would do, I'm fine with that. But that's not all.

The difference, between LA County and SF County, and their treatment of illegal immigrants, relates to violent felons. That's the major distinction. Illegal immigrants aren't being oppressed in California, with the exception of being oppressed by their employers when they try to get California's Minimum Wage. And yet, strangely enough, the law ignores that part of the plight. I wonder if lobbying funds might be involved...

It would be nice if the state focused more effort on the infrastructure that is literally crumbling instead of nonsense like this, but that must be too much to ask.

Please don't mention infrastructure to our Government, otherwise you'll get another speed rail, this time between Eureka and San Diego.

[Risottia]

...
While illegal immigrant renters, (at least the nonviolent ones,) deserve protection from greedy landlords...

I can't really wrap my head around the idea of a landlord being allowed to sign a legally-binding contract of tenancy with someone who lacks the legal requirements to stay in the country... which makes me think that those contract were illegal to begin with and that the landlord never paid taxes on the profit he made from that.

[Lady Scylla]

The bill adds immigration status to an existing list of things that cannot be used to get you out of your apartment. Taken in context, it's not unreasonable.

My thoughts as well.

[Community Values]

Let's see if Republicans are so pro-states rights now that the democrats are using it.

[Shofercia]

...
While illegal immigrant renters, (at least the nonviolent ones,) deserve protection from greedy landlords...

I can't really wrap my head around the idea of a landlord being allowed to sign a legally-binding contract of tenancy with someone who lacks the legal requirements to stay in the country... which makes me think that those contract were illegal to begin with and that the landlord never paid taxes on the profit he made from that.

I guess, (not sure,) it's legal, but if a landlord wanted to pay less in taxes, there's no need to illegally dodge it. The landlord could, (I think he can, not sure,) register his building as a corporation, and buy additional land somewhere else, while using the profits made from this building to pay for the additional purchase, and said money won't be taxed, since it's a business expense subtracted from his business revenue.

Let's see if Republicans are so pro-states rights now that the democrats are using it.

If they're smart, they'd bring in a case where you have a landlord, being asked by the FBI but not required, to divulge if said landlord has any illegal immigrants, who are also violent felons, living on his property, and the landlord has one - the one who acts extremely rude to everyone else, but never gets caught for criminal activity. If the Republicans find a case like that, win or lose, the Democrats lose. Somehow I doubt that'll happen.

[Proctopeo]

I'm amazed. Chiu managed to make a bill that makes me consider siding with Trump on this one.
I'm at a loss for words, I'm sorry.

[Galloism]

I can't really wrap my head around the idea of a landlord being allowed to sign a legally-binding contract of tenancy with someone who lacks the legal requirements to stay in the country... which makes me think that those contract were illegal to begin with and that the landlord never paid taxes on the profit he made from that.

I guess, (not sure,) it's legal, but if a landlord wanted to pay less in taxes, there's no need to illegally dodge it. The landlord could, (I think he can, not sure,) register his building as a corporation, and buy additional land somewhere else, while using the profits made from this building to pay for the additional purchase, and said money won't be taxed, since it's a business expense subtracted from his business revenue.

Land is neither deductible nor depreciable, not for individuals and not for corporations.

[Shofercia]

I guess, (not sure,) it's legal, but if a landlord wanted to pay less in taxes, there's no need to illegally dodge it. The landlord could, (I think he can, not sure,) register his building as a corporation, and buy additional land somewhere else, while using the profits made from this building to pay for the additional purchase, and said money won't be taxed, since it's a business expense subtracted from his business revenue.

Land is neither deductible nor depreciable, not for individuals and not for corporations.

Oh crap, I said just land. Drat! Wasn't what I had in mind, but you were right to criticize it. Anyways, let's say that you have this hypo:

Rent Income: $10,000 / month
Rent Expenses: $5,000 / month
Construction Expenses: $5,000 / month

Would say person be paying a penny in income taxes? Let's say that the construction is occurring on an adjoining lot, but it's a new apartment building, under the same C-Corp or S-Corp.

[Thermodolia]

Let's see if Republicans are so pro-states rights now that the democrats are using it.

They dropped that as soon as Sessions became AG

[Kash Island]

I hate the laws of my home state CA...from guns, to taxes to immigration...they lose there minds.

[Rio Cana]

I hate the laws of my home state CA...from guns, to taxes to immigration...they lose there minds.

Then move to Florida.
Even the pop music in FL. is different. Yes, this is a pop group formed in FL. - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5-oCyBQW8k

[Galloism]

Land is neither deductible nor depreciable, not for individuals and not for corporations.

Oh crap, I said just land. Drat! Wasn't what I had in mind, but you were right to criticize it. Anyways, let's say that you have this hypo:

Rent Income: $10,000 / month
Rent Expenses: $5,000 / month
Construction Expenses: $5,000 / month

Would say person be paying a penny in income taxes? Let's say that the construction is occurring on an adjoining lot, but it's a new apartment building, under the same C-Corp or S-Corp.

Generally construction expenses for a structure must be capitalized under the uniform capitalization rules.

https://www.irs.gov/businesses/cost-seg ... talization

So, such a person as you've described MIGHT be paying income taxes. In fact, they probably would be.

[Herskerstad]

Looks rather tricky to enforce, bills that semantics can overcome generally have little effect.

[Kash Island]

I hate the laws of my home state CA...from guns, to taxes to immigration...they lose there minds.

Then move to Florida.
Even the pop music in FL. is different. Yes, this is a pop group formed in FL. - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5-oCyBQW8k

no thanks, im in Washington now, where it's colder and I'm more free.