#ordinance on convicted

[dubiousdisco]

What is brazils viewpoint on illegal immigrants. Do they deport?

In Brazil, all immigrants have the same rights to education, health and work, whether they are refugees or not.

There are also some ordinances that provide for residence authorization for some specific nationalities.

ex haiti, venezuela, syria, afghanistan

There are no illegal immigrants. they may be in an irregular situation in the country, that being, not have an appropriate documentation for their situation. To live regularly in Brazil, you must have a residence permit. Not having the right document does not make a person a criminal, as this infraction is administrative. They will be able to resolve this situation and then be allowed to reside in Brazil. (source in pt)

The Constitution prohibits the extradition of native Brazilians and foreigners convicted of political or opinion crimes. Naturalized Brazilians can only be extradited for common crimes committed before naturalization or in the case of drug trafficking.

Deportation, provided for in Law 13,445/2017, known as the Migration Law, consists of the compulsory removal of a person in an irregular migration situation in the country. It results from an administrative procedure and is preceded by personal notification with an express list of irregularities and a deadline for regularizing the situation, in order to avoid deportation.

Also provided for in the Migration Law, expulsion is an administrative measure of compulsory removal of a migrant or visitor from Brazilian territory and impediment of re-entry into the country, for a determined period. What can give rise to expulsion is conviction for genocide or crimes against humanity, war or aggression, as well as the commission of an intentional crime, when there is intent, punishable by imprisonment. (source in pt)

Brazil has progressive and open immigration laws that allow migrants and refugees to quickly receive regularized status and apply for formal employment.

(Source in english)

Ministry of justice will restringe entry of immigrants without visa (in Brazil) source in pt

that's all i could find. there was a rise in deportation during 2020 (covid), 26901 when in 2019 it was 36. it is not usual.

the only personal experience i can share is that a lot of haitians live here in my city after 2018 and a lot of venezuelans arrive constantly, some start living here. and yeah never heard of them being deported from here personally

[justinspoliticalcorner]

S. Baum at Erin In The Morning:

When 20-year-old college student Marcy Rheintgen made her yearly spring break trip to her grandparents’ property in Florida, she said she felt at peace — until March 19, when police escorted her out of the bathroom of the State Capitol Building and placed her in handcuffs. Evidently, Rheintgen had violated a 2023 state law criminalizing trans people who use government-owned public restrooms that align with their gender. Tampa Bay Times reporter Romy Ellenbogen accompanied Rheintgen to the Capitol. When they arrived, several officers were stationed outside the women’s restroom doors. They warned her not to enter the women’s restroom. Draped in a white, frilly dress and a pink bow, Rheintgen went in anyway and washed her hands. That’s when police entered the restroom and told Rheintgen she was being detained. A devout Catholic, she had wanted to take a moment to pray the rosary, but she never got the chance. After spending less than 60 seconds in the women’s restroom, Rheintgen said, she was charged with trespassing with a warning. Meanwhile, her rosary was confiscated as an officer from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement handcuffed and detained Rheintgen, searched her person and her vehicle, and then shuttled her to the Leon County Detention Facility, where she stayed overnight in the men’s ward. If convicted, she could spend up to 60 days incarcerated. The FDLE did not respond to a request for comment. About a week before her trek, she sent about a hundred and sixty print letters to Florida lawmakers announcing she would engage in the time-honored practice of civil disobedience: She would use the women’s restroom at the Florida State Capitol. She named her date and time.

“I know that as a transgender woman, this means I will probably be arrested. I am violating laws because I personally believe it to be wrong. “I’m not a political activist,” she told Erin in the Morning. “I’m just a normal college student who thinks this law is wrong.”

[...] Rheintgen said she was motivated to act after seeing the anti-trans legislation surge throughout the United States, and when she read about Hunter Schafer, the Euphoria actress, who was issued a “male” passport despite being a woman. “She’s a personal hero of mine,” Rheintgen said. The fear and the vitriol she saw play out over the news cycle brought her to a breaking point. While bills like bathroom bans and drag bans have been sweeping the country in recent years, the criminalization of gender diverse people is by no means new. Black and brown trans women, especially, have been routinely criminalized for decades under the guise of “solicitation” or “loitering” ordinances, even in a so-called liberal stronghold like New York. The phenomenon is so pervasive that it has been dubbed the “Walking While Trans Ban.”

20-year-old trans woman Marcy Rheintgen put civil disobedience into action against Florida’s unjust bathroom bans for trans people into action. 🏳️‍⚧️

See Also:

LGBTQ Nation: Trans woman arrested for washing her hands in a women’s bathroom

[portraitsofsaints]

Saint John Ogilvie

1579 - 1615

Feast Day: March 10

Patron of Scotland

Saint John Ogilvie was a Scottish Roman Catholic Jesuit martyr, born into a wealthy respected Calvinist family in 1579. In the midst of the religious controversies and turmoil that engulfed Europe of that era, he decided to become a Roman Catholic. He joined the Society of Jesus and was ordained a priest in Paris in 1610. After ordination, he returned to Scotland in November 1613 disguised as a horse trader named John Watson, to minister to the few remaining Roman Catholics in the Glasgow area where it was illegal to preach or otherwise endorse Roman Catholicism. In 1614, he was betrayed and arrested in Glasgow, convicted of high treason for refusing to accept the King's spiritual jurisdiction, suffered terrible tortures and was hanged.

Prints, plaques & holy cards available for purchase. (website)

[literaryvein-reblogs]

What are the laws? About ancient laws? I think there were old laws in the Chinese Empire that called for family extermination. your family was erased, but I don't know how much about it. I wanted to write the MC and sibling survived this law. and without them realizing it?

Writing Notes: The T'ang Code

Tang dynasty - (618–907 CE) or T'ang; Chinese dynasty that developed a successful form of government and administration on the preceeding Sui model, and stimulated a cultural and artistic flowering that amounted to a golden age.

Marked by strong and benevolent rule, successful diplomatic relationships, economic expansion, and a cultural efflorescence of cosmopolitan style, Tang China emerged as one of the greatest empires in the medieval world.

Merchants, clerics, and envoys from India, Persia, Arabia, Syria, Korea, and Japan thronged the streets of Chang’an, the capital, and foreign tongues were a common part of daily life.

This dynasty—like most—rose in duplicity and murder, and it subsided into a kind of anarchy. But at its apex, in the early 8th century, the splendour of its arts and its cultural milieu made it a model for the world.

The Tang dynasty also flourished because special attention was paid to molding an orderly society through the promulgation of sophisticated law codes. From ancient times, in China, law was viewed as an expression of the will of the emperor, whose pronouncements defined illegal conduct and proper punishments for it.

The T'ang Code

The T'ang Code contains 12 sections, and is divided into 2 parts:

an initial section expounding the general principles of criminal law, and

a second section setting forth the specific offenses covered, together with the punishment for each such act.

In the first years of the dynasty a series of criminal codes and administrative statutes were promulgated in order to govern the empire effectively.

Though only the Code has survived in entirety, we know from historical sources, as well as from still extant fragments, that there was a large body of written law in effect during the T'ang period.

There were 4 main divisions: the Code, the Statutes, the Regulations, and the Ordinances.

The Code reflects the position of the emperor as the most important link between the human and the natural worlds as well as the head of the government.

Offenses that involve the emperor or the imperial house are on a different level from those against other persons.

In such cases not only the criminal but also his family members would be executed and their possessions confiscated by the state.

Such crimes head a list of ten categories of offenses that were regarded as particularly heinous.

Not only were the punishments especially severe for persons who committed such offenses, but certain other procedural protections, usually available to those convicted of other crimes, were not allowed to them.

The Ten Abominations. The most serious offenses a person could commit.

Plotting rebellion

Plotting great sedition

Plotting treason

Contumacy

Depravity

Great irreverance

Lack of filial piety

Discord

Unrighteousness

Incest

The crimes included within the ten abominations are those that endanger the emperor or the state, those that are committed by subordinate members of the family or bureaucracy against their superiors, those that threaten the existence of the family, and those that involve black magic.

The penalties for the first 3 "abominations" called for punishment not only of the individual incriminated in the plot, but also of that person’s entire family (parents, children, brothers, and sisters) who were liable for penalties up to and including execution.

Rebellion against the imperial house is compared to natural calamities.

The intent of the Code toward those who plot either rebellion or great sedition is clearly stated in Article 32:

Plotting rebellion and great sedition are criminal to the utmost degree of censure and extermination. They defile the whole family and property and the eradication of evil must reach to the roots.

Clearly, then, the purpose of the law in such cases was not merely to punish the criminal, but rather to exterminate his whole family.

In traditional China, with its great emphasis on the continuation of the family, there could be no greater punishment than to end a family's name.

Officials could also be punished for the offenses of their family members. For example, if within the area under an official's control one of his family members committed extortion or accepted bribes, the official would be punished, even though he knew nothing of the crime.

Older members of families also had increased responsibility because of their status and reciprocity.

If they committed a crime together with other members of the family, only the person highest in generation of age was punished.

The younger members of the family escaped completely.

The same was true for other groups such as those living in monasteries or for teachers and their disciples. Where members of the same family committed a crime by the decision of the head of the household, only he was punished even though he took no part in the crime.

An excerpt from "The Tripartite Compact of Emperor Kao" (Han dynasty):

My Venerable Seniors! I know too well how long you, my fellow-countrymen, have suffered untold hardships under the harassing laws of the preceding dynasty, by which the criticizing of ·government was punished with the extermination of one's whole family, and even talking on the streets was prohibited under pain of decapitation

Sources: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ⚜ More: References ⚜ Writing Resources PDFs

Hope this helps with your writing, sounds really interesting so far.

[beardedmrbean]

The homeless man tackled and zip-tied by onlookers who say he was trying to start fires with a blowtorch near a Los Angeles wildfire is an illegal immigrant who will likely be protected by California’s sanctuary city status, according to sources.

The suspect is Juan Manuel Sierra-Leyva, a Mexican national who is in the United States illegally, sources told The Post.

He was chased and taken down by residents of Woodland Hills after they allegedly saw him torching old Christmas trees and debris on fire with what one resident described as a “flamethrower” soon after the massive wildfire began Thursday.

The suspect is being held on a felony probation violation, the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) said, without detailing his previous conviction.

Detectives are still investigating it as possible arson, but LAPD Assistant Chief Dominic Choi said Friday that there was not immediately enough evidence for that charge.

ICE placed a detainer request on him three days ago, but the federal agency does not expect it to be honored due to California’s sanctuary state law, sources said.

“The lack of communication between local and federal law enforcement agencies in Los Angeles due to sanctuary policies put in place by LA city council and Governor [Gavin] Newsom, have resulted in many arrests that have been unreported to and followed up by ICE,” a law enforcement source told The Post.

“Many of which are criminals who have numerous encounters with local law enforcement for serious crimes,” they added.

California’s sanctuary state law, passed in 2017, ensures that no state resources are used to assist federal immigration enforcement.

The Los Angeles City Council unanimously passed an ordinance in November that prohibits the use of city resources and personnel to carry out federal immigration enforcement.

Sierra-Leyva has a lengthy rap sheet in LA County and has been convicted of multiple crimes — including assault with a deadly weapon in 2023, records show.

He has collectively spent more than two years in jail, sources told The Post. 

It’s not clear where or when he crossed into the US.

Video that went viral shows neighbors cornering and then detaining Sierra-Leyva as he holds what one resident described as a “flamethrower” on the street, with one man yelling at him: “Put it down!”

Renata Grinshpun told KTLA she was in her backyard when she heard a car screech to a stop and a man yelling that someone was trying to start a fire.

“A few gentlemen surrounded him and got him on his knees. They got some zip ties, a rope and we were able to do a citizens’ arrest,” Grinshpun said.

The LAPD responded and arrested Sierra-Leyva, video from the scene shows. The major crimes squad was called in because he was “a possible arson suspect” — but no arson charges were brought against him, Choi told reporters Friday.

The Kenneth Fire burned more than 1,050 acres (1.6 square miles) over three days in Los Angeles and Ventura counties. It was completely contained by Sunday morning.

The cause of the fire remains under investigation.

[hallikset]

Hermitcraft V. Mumbo from the POV of someone with no court knowledge <3

while im not very good at law, the frustration i felt watching hermitcraft v mumbo is INSANE. ON BOTH SIDES!!

"I'd like to point out, the plaintiff is a convicted criminal of this court"

Okay and? Objection, what is the relevance??? His crime is totally different from the charges being brought upon Mr. Mumbo K. Jumbo (i believe anyway, i have not seen doc's case)

However, the plaintiffs were all over the place in terms of the charges brought to Mumbo. Noise ordinances/pollution, environmental pollution, zoning laws, smth about loss of profit--im sure there's more.

Also, despite how this is NOT how courts work (in america, anyway) loved how Bdubs just. Basically did lawyer work.

Anyway, someone get Quackity on Tall Claims Court he'd eat them ALL up. Or go insane.

[lbibliophile-sw]

Technicalities

Also on AO3 [300w] @foxquinweek - day 2: “Unfortunately, General, I would need to be a sentient being for that.” & day 5: Fox kills the Chancellor Can be considered as a sequel to this drabble – Uncovering Corruption

Mace Windu glares at the two men standing before him, trying to decide which is more insolent: the Clone Commander’s textbook-perfect ‘at attention’ or the Jedi Master’s casual lounging against thin air.

“Care to explain what I am supposed to do with the fact that the two of you just murdered the kriffing Supreme Chancellor?”

“It wasn’t murder.”

“Wasn’t-! Fine. You do realise, Commander Fox, that calling it an assassination doesn’t actually make the situation any better?”

“Wasn’t an assassination either."

"I mean, in my case the motivation was about 50:50 personal/political so I guess you can take your pick; but I’d have to be legally considered sentient to be actually convicted of either. As things stand, the options are that I malfunctioned – in which case I would appreciate your assistance in avoiding the consequences of that verdict – or it was ‘misappropriation of GAR ordinance’. Except that as a General, Vos does actually have the authority to requisition my services, including retroactively submitting relevantpaperwork, so we should be in the clear.”

“That’s… you know what, I’ll take your word for it. Master Vos, on the other hand. Even if you didn’t ‘steal’ the Commander, there’s still that issue of the Chancellor’s murder and/or assassination. How do you explain that?

“Still neither.”

“Vos…”

“Look, it’s simple. I’m a Jedi. The Chancellor was a Sith. And we have evidence of him actively conspiring against the Order and the Republic both. So I was merely fulfilling my duty; ‘damage control’ if you will. All perfectly within my remit.”

“The Chancellor is a Sith. And you didn’t think to come to the Council with this before confronting and killing the man?!”

“In all seriousness, I did consider it. But there was too high a chance that he would realise we figured out his secret, so we had to act before he had a chance to implement any contingencies. Besides, would you really have given permission if we had asked?”

“Maybe not. But I’m certainly never going to forgive you for dumping this mess in my lap now!”

“Y’know what? Fair.”

[morlock-holmes]

In one of those things that makes you feel like reality is slipping away, Neil Gorsuch, in his majority opinion, essentially paraphrases that famous Anatole French quote,

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread."

Here's Gorsuch (Page 3 of the decision):

Grants Pass’s public-camping ordinances do not criminalize status. The public-camping laws prohibit actions undertaken by any person, regardless of status. It makes no difference whether the charged defendant is currently a person experiencing homelessness, a backpacker on vacation, or a student who abandons his dorm room to camp out in protest on the lawn of a municipal building.

The man isn't an idiot. His argument is that, in the precedent cited, the Supreme Court ruled that one cannot criminalize a status. Specifically, it cannot criminalize the status of being an addict.

(c) Plaintiffs insist the Court should extend Robinson to prohibit the enforcement of laws that proscribe certain acts that are in some sense “involuntary,” because some homeless individuals cannot help but do what the law forbids. See Brief for Respondents 24–25, 29, 32. The Ninth Circuit pursued this line of thinking below and in Martin, but this Court already rejected it in Powell v. Texas, 392 U. S. 514. In Powell, the Court confronted a defendant who had been convicted under a Texas statute making it a crime to “ ‘get drunk or be found in a state of intoxication in any public place.’ ” Id., at 517 (plurality opinion). Like the plaintiffs here, Powell argued that his drunkenness was an “‘involuntary’” byproduct of his status as an alcoholic. Id., at 533. The Court did not agree that Texas’s law effectively criminalized Powell’s status as an alcoholic. Writing for a plurality, Justice Marshall observed that Robinson’s “very small” intrusion “into the substantive criminal law” prevents States only from enforcing laws that criminalize “a mere status.” Id., at 532–533. It does nothing to curtail a State’s authority to secure a conviction when “the accused has committed some act . . . society has an interest in preventing.” Id., at 533. That remains true, Justice Marshall continued, even if the defendant’s conduct might, “in some sense” be described as “ ‘involuntary’ or ‘occasioned by’” a particular status. Ibid.

My counterargument would be that not all alcoholics drink, and they certainly do not all get drunk in a public place.

All homeless people must sleep.

My big picture question is that, if you have a status that essentially requires certain behavior, what, in practice, is the distinction between criminalizing the status and criminalizing the behavior?

Suppose I do not have private property on which I am allowed to sleep; how might I avoid getting arrested for violating this ordinance?

The answer is that I literally cannot. By definition.

The court, I suspect, would argue back that essentially "Not having private property on which to sleep" is itself not a status, but a behavior, and the state may have a justified reason to criminalize the behavior of not acquiring private property on which to sleep.

I hope I don't need to explain why I find that barbaric (And frankly, stupid as well).

PS - The conflation between behavior that is occasioned by a status and behavior that is involuntary in Powell seems like a moral mistake by the court. An Alcoholic may get drunk in his house, rather than in public; therefore, even though public drunkenness is clearly occasioned by his status as an addict, it is not involuntary.

For example, imagine a state law which makes it illegal to check your blood sugar. Does this not essentially criminalize the status of being Diabetic? If the state objected that it had not criminalized being a diabetic, because all citizens were forbidden from checking their blood sugar, I hope we'd be able to dismiss that as the absurdity that it is.

[axvoter]

Update on my Review VII (WA 2025): Stop Pedophiles! Save kiddies!

Perhaps the most entertaining review to write during this WA state electoral cycle was that of Stop Pedophiles! Save kiddies! [sic] and there is yet more to say about them. As with my first review, I will refer to them as SPPK for convenience.

First, I noted how utterly anonymous the SPPK’s candidates are, with most listed only by initial and last name. Some scouting around has enabled me to identify at least a couple of them. One appears to be Radomar Kobryn-Coletti, who in 2019 claimed to have no commitment to any political party even though he worked in a role churning out far-right memes for the Facebook page of Fraser Anning, one of our most bilious senators of recent years (in a crowded field!). Kobryn-Coletti is down in 11th, while up in 3rd is an A. Middleton: this is Andrew Middleton, who is active in far-right “freedom” circles.

Middleton appears to have not gone ahead with a projected independent candidature and joined the SPPK instead. He has an Andrew for WA Facebook page, which, among some extreme stuff including “vaccine injury” covid conspiracism, includes a link to an already-defunct Independents for WA page. You can still view it via the Wayback Machine: here’s one version promoting him in January; and an updated version promoting a bunch of people that appears to have gone offline mid-February after the deadline to nominate for the election passed. It seems he was going to co-ordinate far-right independents, including some now associated with Group M, and others who haven’t stood at all.

Neither Middleton nor Kobryn-Coletti suggest anything good will come from the SPPK—and the party’s how-to-vote cards (HTVs) confirm this. They have registered a bunch of HTVs with the WA Electoral Commission, most of them after I drafted my original review and queued it to post. The page with all HTVs is here; use the filter options to select “Legislative Council cards by party” and scroll down.

They’re very rough HTVs, some of the most basic and crude I have seen, and they coalesce around messages for tougher punishment of paedophiles and greater police funding. WA last year passed new legislation to toughen and extend police monitoring of known sex offenders in the community, but this evidently isn’t far enough for SPPK, who appear to oppose any sort of community release for people convicted of sex crimes against minors. They would mandate life sentences for murdering police officers, despite the fact that removing discretion from judges can lead to negative outcomes and undermines the independence of the judiciary. Some of the HTVs specify that the SPPK would fund a police task force to the tune of $5 million annually, plus another $1 million for victim support groups; they do not explain how they came to this total and what gaps or shortfalls they seek to address with it beyond “moar cops!”

Not all their HTVs are emotive “protect kiddies” calls to action. It seems they’re using HTVs as their one way of disseminating policy. You won’t be surprised to learn they’re transphobes who insist on a gender binary, for instance. Although they’re passionate about protecting “kiddies”, they don’t seem to be a fan of young adults and think of them as ungrateful layabouts: they want to compel all Western Australians aged 18–22 to either serve in the Army Reserve or the Department of Fire and Emergency Services so that they can “become Heroes not victims”. This is SPPK’s idea of a bushfire policy! Another HTV states a housing policy: scrapping stamp duty for anyone over 60, ostensibly so they can downsize and free up family homes in WA. I can’t see this having any unintended consequences or being exploited in the slightest! (hoo boy I can)

Predictably they hate “the Greenies” and “their mad energy policies”, they want to ban all wind farms, and they support continued mining and gas exploration. The best of their HTVs on this theme claims “Greenies and the Left hate the family 4WD”, which, look, guilty as charged: I loathe motonormativity (car brain), desire much greater modal choice, and endorse policies that deprioritise cars in favour of public and active transport for a whole host of reasons. Giant road beasts in urban areas are dangerous for pedestrians and cyclists, they cause much greater wear of road surfaces, and they barely even fit into parking spaces, so, yes, tax them into oblivion. Instead, the SPPK want to slash the state diesel tax and they seem to be afraid that not just catering to the whims of 4WD drivers will send us back to using goat carts.

Some HTVs, such as this one, have an odd emphasis on getting things done in the first 100 days after the election. This “first 100 days” malarkey (which from my understanding has been borrowed from US political discourse) seems to be growing in popularity in Australia and NZ as a way for parties to suggest they are serious and for new governments to show they have entered office purposefully and are Doin Thangs. What it often means in practice is rushed policy with inadequate expert oversight or community input.

My favourite, though? The fat cats HTV, which depicts a fat politician with two cat heads. It uses the Democrats’ old “keep the bastards honest” slogan and suggests SPPK will be “an angry dog in the game”. Personally, I’d rather cool heads in parliament, not angry dogs—or people who cynically drum up fear about crimes against children to advance a far-right agenda.

Edit, 7 March: see a second update here

[ausetkmt]

At President Trump's rally in Tampa last week, a familiar face made it back in the national news. Maurice Symonette, also known as Michael the Black Man, was front and center in a crowd hurling invective at CNN reporter Jim Acosta, waving a "Blacks for Trump" sign.

Symonette has been a regular at Trump rallies all over Florida and as far away as Arizona. Just last month, he popped up at the U.S. border to appear in a video with disgraced sheriff-turned-pardoned-Senate-candidate Joe Arpaio.

All that national exposure raises an obvious question: Who is paying the bills for Symonette, a former member of Miami's murderous Yahweh ben Yahweh cult, to represent "Blacks for Trump" at Trump rallies? 

Since Blacks for Trump isn't a registered political organization with the Florida Division of Elections or the Federal Election Commission, there are no public records of any donations funding the group's operations.

It seems unlikely Symonette is fronting the cash for his travel himself because he filed for bankruptcy this past May. In federal court records, he reports that he's unemployed, generates no income, and has $0 in the bank. He also says four banks have staked claims on $2.9 million worth of property around Dade County. 

So how is he getting to Arizona and Tampa to stand behind Trump on national TV?  Reached on his cell phone, Symonette declined to discuss his group's financing. "You guys are horrible racists," he said. "You are lawbreakers and you're mean... God is going to punish you horribly."

Throughout the '80s, Symonette — then known as Maurice Woodside — was a devoted follower of Yahweh ben Yahweh, a charismatic preacher who wore white robes and called himself the Messiah.

Federal prosecutors later accused Yahweh, whose real name was Hulon Mitchell Jr., of ordering his followers to murder at least 14 people, including random white vagrants who were massacred as an initiation rite.

Symonette was charged in federal court along with Mitchell and 15 other followers in 1990; while the cult's leader was later convicted of 14 charges of murder conspiracy and served nearly two decades in prison, Symonette and six other cult members were acquitted.

In the decades since, Symonette has been charged with crimes including grand theft auto, carrying a weapon onto an airplane, and threatening a police officer, but has never been convicted. (He does have a pending case on a municipal ordinance charge in Hollywood after police showed up to a really loud party he threw.)

Since Trump's election, Symonette has carved out an unlikely new niche as one of President Trump's most visible African-American supporters. He has a knack for getting prime placement directly behind Trump and has handed out hundreds of his "Blacks for Trump" signs.

They advertise his website, which is full of conspiracy theories about Cherokees running the U.S. banking system. (Really.)

Symonette was even featured at a Miami Trump rally that prosecutors later alleged had been funded by Russian nationals looking to disrupt the election.

Symonette filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy on May 16, listing Washington Mutual, Homecomings Financial, HSBC Bank, and Indymac Bank as his creditors; each institution laid claim to one of four houses. Three are in North Miami-Dade County, and one is near Kendall.

In court docs, his only listed assets are clothing, watches, various household items, and a pool table. He does say that his live-in girlfriend, whom he doesn't identify by name, provides him with $2,000 per month.

Could that money from his significant other cover Blacks for Trump's various trips around the country to support the president on TV? Symonette wouldn't discuss that with a New Times reporter. 

Instead, he spoke at length about his belief that the banking system is corrupt. He added that "Trump being the president is the greatest blessing we have ever had."

In his bankruptcy case, he's repeated those allegations about the banking system being crooked to Judge Laurel M. Isicoff. He's also repeatedly sought to change hearings that overlapped with Trump events. Symonette suggested the scheduling conflicts are a sinister plot to keep him away from the spotlight at Trump rallies.

"Creditors know that I have a rally in Arizona on July 25 and deliberately set the hearing on that date to cause me and my musical band to miss the performance and the rally with the bus we rented," he wrote in a motion filed the same morning as the Phoenix rally. "The creditors overheard that at the house we are disputing... and set that hearing on the same date just to harm me."

That motion was denied, as was another he filed on July 30, just before Trump's Tampa rally. "As founder of Blacks for Trump, (I) have rented vans to go to Trump's rally. We need to make the country aware how the banks (FOREIGNERS FROM THE EAST) are illegally taking WHITE AND BLACK PEOPLE'S houses away."

Maurice Symonette's story is baffling, to put it mildly. Symonette, who also goes by the name Michael the Black Man, somehow went from being part of the murderous Yahweh ben Yahweh cult to getting acquitted of murder charges himself to being a staple at Donald Trump's presidential rallies all over the country. Even among the rogue's gallery of rodeo clowns and Bond villains who make up Trump's core cadre of supporters, Symonette might legitimately be the weirdest person hovering around Trumpworld

.

After Michael the Black Man turned up at a Tampa-area Trump rally last week and led anti-press chants, it's worth taking note of all the bizarre places he's materialized since becoming a prominent Trump supporter:

1. At the original October 2016 Trump rally where he first popped up on TV:

Conservative Twitter is abuzz this afternoon with a trending hashtag: #BlacksForTrump. The spark is clear: Thousands have retweeted photos from Trump's rally in Lakeland, Florida, this afternoon showing a small group standing directly behind the Donald while enthusiastically waving "Blacks for Trump" signs. "Blacks are for Trump and the left can't stand it," writes @LawlessPirate, with another pic of the sign-waving man wearing a shirt reading "Trump & Republicans Are Not Racist." So who is this new face of Trump's elusive black support? He's none other than Michael the Black Man, also known as Maurice Woodside or Michael Symonette, who has made waves in Miami in recent years with protests against the Democratic Party and rallies for the GOP. He's also a former member of the murderous Yahweh ben Yahweh cult, which was led by the charismatic preacher Hulon Mitchell Jr., who was charged by the feds in 1990 with conspiracy in killings that included a gruesome beheading in the Everglades. Michael, along with 15 other Yahweh followers, was charged for allegedly conspiring in two murders; his brother, who was also in the cult, told jurors that Michael had helped beat one man who was later killed and stuck a sharpened stick into another man's eyeball. But jurors found Michael (and six other Yahweh followers) innocent. They sent Mitchell away for 20 years in the federal pen. In the years that followed, Michael changed his last name to Symonette, made a career as a musician, started a radio station in Miami, and then reinvented himself as Michael the Black Man, an anti-gay, anti-liberal preacher with a golden instinct for getting on TV at GOP events. He's planned events with Rick Santorum and gotten cable news play for bashing Obama. Since 1997, he's been charged with grand theft auto, carrying a weapon onto an airplane and threatening a police officer, but never convicted in any of those cases. 

2. At a Trump rally in Bayfront Park in Miami just before the election: 3. At a rally allegedly organized with the help of Russian agents:

A federal grand jury filed charges against 13 Russian nationals [in February 2018] for allegedly stealing identities, wiring money overseas, and staging a small series of flash mobs to help tip the 2016 election in Donald Trump's favor. It's unclear whether the social media campaign had any actual impact on voting, but the FBI alleges Russian money indeed affected one small group of Miamians who unknowingly used Russian cash to pay for supplies for an unnamed rally the September before the presidential election. There still seem to be online traces of that Moscow-funded rally. Only one publicized, pro-Trump rally appears to have taken place in the Miami area — #LatinosConTrump in Doral at 1 p.m. September 11, 2016. The event was pitched as an "anti-media" protest outside the town's Univision offices. The national group Latinos With Trump created flyers for the rally and noted that virtually all of Miami's most prominent pro-Trump groups — Cubans 4 Trump, Hispanas for Trump, Latinas for Trump, and the official Miami Trump Volunteers — would attend.

4. At a 2017 Trump rally in Phoenix, per the Washington Post:

And so it was Tuesday night before a crowd of Trump supporters in Phoenix who had come to watch another show. There was the president, whipping up the wildly cheering crowd, and then there was Michael the Black Man, chanting just beyond Trump’s right shoulder in that trademark T-shirt. The presence of Michael — variously known as Michael Symonette, Maurice Woodside and Mikael Israel — has inspired not only trending Twitter hashtags but a great deal of curiosity and Google searches. Internet sleuths find the man’s bizarre URL, an easily accessible gateway to his strange and checkered past. The radical fringe activist from Miami once belonged to a violent black supremacist religious cult, and he runs a handful of amateur, unintelligible conspiracy websites. He has called Barack Obama “The Beast” and Hillary Clinton a Ku Klux Klan member. Oprah Winfrey, he says, is the devil. Most curiously, in the 1990s, he was charged, then acquitted, with conspiracy to commit two murders.

5. With noted racist Sheriff Joe Arpaio at the U.S.-Mexico border just last week:

Via our sister paper Phoenix New Times:

Former sheriff Joe Arpaio filmed a video at the U.S.-Mexico border with a former Florida cult member who goes by the name Michael the Black Man. In the video posted on Thursday, Michael has his arm around Arpaio as the ousted former sheriff promotes his improbable race for Arizona's open Senate seat during a visit to the border fence in Naco, Arizona. Michael was a follower of the Yahweh ben Yahweh cult, a black-supremacist religious sect in Florida. In 1990, the feds charged Michael and over a dozen fellow cult members with conspiracy related to brutal murders in Florida. Alongside Arpaio and Michael in the video is an independent Senate candidate in Massachusetts, Shiva Ayyadurai, who shared the live video on Twitter. Born in India, Ayyadurai is a scientist and MIT graduate who claims that he invented email. He began his Senate campaign as a Republican before switching to run as an independent. Ayyadurai’s campaign uses the slogan, “Defeat #FakeIndian Elizabeth Warren,” as a derogatory jab at his Democratic opponent. “First of all, I’m from Massachusetts, so of course I’m supporting this great guy,” Arpaio says of Ayyadurai in the video. “He’s gonna win.” Michael says, “We’re at the border right here, between Arizona and Mexico.” He turns to Arpaio to ask if he has anything to say to the camera. The aging former sheriff brings up his law enforcement background. “It’s great to see the border again; I haven’t seen it in a while,” Arpaio says. 

If you've got any info on who's paying Symonette's travel bills to Trump rallies, email [email protected] or [email protected]

For a second, Donald Trump seemed to be backing off his vitriolic attacks on the free press. After five journalists were massacred at the Annapolis Capital Gazette, Trump briefly toned down his slurs. He even invited New York Times publisher A.G. Sulzburger to the White House to clear the air. But it didn't last.

Trump quickly returned to his Stalinist, enemies-of-the-people label for journalists and then lied about his meeting with Sulzburger to insist that truthful reporting is "fake news." Those insults have a real effect, and that fact was never frighteningly clearer than at Trump's rally last night in Tampa, where an unhinged-looking mob screamed insults and waved middle fingers at journalists, particularly CNN's chief White House correspondent, Jim Acosta.

The scene left many political watchers deeply shaken, including Acosta:

Just a sample of the sad scene we faced at the Trump rally in Tampa. I’m very worried that the hostility whipped up by Trump and some in conservative media will result in somebody getting hurt. We should not treat our fellow Americans this way. The press is not the enemy. pic.twitter.com/IhSRw5Ui3R— Jim Acosta (@Acosta) August 1, 2018

But most national press watchers didn't notice who was right at the center of that mob hurling invective at Acosta and his colleagues: Yep, it was Michael the Black Man, AKA Maurice Symonette, a former member of Miami's murderous Yahweh ben Yawheh cult who once faced charges of conspiring in the group's murders.

That's him with his instantly recognizable "Blacks for Trump" sign:

.@Acosta is trying to do a stand-up at #trumptampa and the crowd is booing and chanting “CNN sucks” behind him. pic.twitter.com/XiULajB1Li— Emily L. Mahoney (@mahoneysthename) July 31, 2018

Symonette has been a mainstay at Florida Trump rallies and over the past year has popped up at other Trump-linked events around the nation. Just last week, he flew to Arizona to film a video at the border with disgraced former sheriff Joe Arpaio. Trump's staff regularly gives Symonette front-and-center seats where he waves his black-and-white sign on national television.

Here's some background on Symonette from New Times' earlier reporting on him:

He's also a former member of the murderous Yahweh ben Yahweh cult, which was led by the charismatic preacher Hulon Mitchell Jr., who was charged by the feds in 1990 with conspiracy in killings that included a gruesome beheading in the Everglades. Michael, along with 15 other Yahweh followers, was charged for allegedly conspiring in two murders; his brother, who was also in the cult, told jurors that Michael had helped beat one man who was later killed and stuck a sharpened stick into another man's eyeball. But jurors found Michael (and six other Yahweh followers) innocent. They sent Mitchell away for 20 years in the federal pen. In the years that followed, he changed his last name to Symonette, made a career as a musician, started a radio station in Miami and then re-invented himself as Michael the Black Man, an anti-gay, anti-liberal preacher with a golden instinct for getting on TV at GOP events. He's planned events with Rick Santorum and gotten cable news play for bashing Obama. Since 1997, he's been charged with grand theft auto, carrying a weapon onto an airplane and threatening a police officer, but never convicted in any of those cases. 

In other words, he's exactly the kind of guy you might not want to drive into a blind rage at journalists who are just trying to do their jobs. Yet there he was in Tampa, right in the middle of the crowd screaming at Acosta — who, incidentally, took time to talk to the crowds who were so angry with him:

After each live shot, @Acosta would walk down and politely talk to the people who just heckled him. He talked to one group for at least 15 minutes. pic.twitter.com/J26nlxfD6k— Christopher Heath (@CHeathWFTV) August 1, 2018

There are two safe bets on this topic going forward: Trump won't stop throwing insults at the media, and wherever the president is whipping up that anger, Michael the Black Man will probably be there with his signs, happily taking the bait.

[fancoloredglasses]

Over the Edge (Well, THAT escalated quickly!)

[All images are owned by DC Comics and Warner Bros-Discovery. I hope I’m too small-fry to sue…]

[Thanks to Batgirlspain for the inspiration]

I originally wanted to review this episode of New Batman Adventures for Halloween, but I think most of you will agree that what I went with instead worked better (though a number have commented that I may have been a bit too harsh. However, I stand by my opinion!) So now, instead of a few days before Halloween, this review will be out a few days after the Day of the Dead, which I think is more appropriate.

If you would like to watch the episode, it’s available on Max or behind your favorite paywall.

We open with Batman and Robin on the run from…

Wait, the GCPD is after Batman (and using deadly force)? AND they know who he is?!  What the fucking fuck?!

One of the officers throws a grenade (what police department lets its officers carry grenades?!) at them, nearly blowing Robin to bits! The Dynamic Duo run for the Batmobile, but…

They have RPGs as well? Why aren’t they using this sort of ordinance on Bane or Killer Croc?!

The officer blows up the Batmobile, cutting off the Caped Crusaders’ escape.

Batman buys some time by using his trophies against Gordon and his men.

Namely, the giant penny.

Then, another avenue of escape is cut off by Detective Montoya, but they jump off the ledge toward the water below and into the waiting Batboat. Gordon is about to fire on them when…

…Alfred joins the struggle. He’s quickly subdued, but bought enough time for the Batboat to clear the Batcave. However, they’re not in the clear yet as…

Once again, the cops have an RPG handy to blow up the Batboat (someone please explain why Gordon’s been just sitting on these), but misses. Just as they’re about to fire another volley…

...Nightwing joins the fray and draws their fire. He then fires mini torpedoes at the Police boat’s engine, disabling it as the Dynamic Duo and Former Boy Wonder make their escape.

But why is the GCPD going all out to take down Batman? And how does Gordon know who Batman is? We’ll let Batman explain…

(Thanks to FLYBOY727)

OK, while I understand Gordon being upset about Batman being responsible for putting Barbara in harm’s way, that’s a HUGE step from blaming him yo being her murderer (after all, Scarecrow was the one who knocked her off of the building)! Personally, I think Bullock was salivating at the chance to take down the Bat and planted the seed in Gordon’s head.

But that still doesn’t explain how Gordon knows who Batman is!

For that, let’s fast forward a bit in this flashback to Wayne Manor where Bruce gets a phone call from Gordon.

OK, THAT explain it, though are you telling me the future Oracle wouldn’t have encrypted her computers out the wazoo?

As Gordon hangs up, Bruce sees the GCPD drive up, including a battering ram tank! (Seriously, if Gordon had access to all of this, then WHY is Gotham’s criminal element allowed to run rampant?!) Bruce and Tim retreat to the Batcave, which brings us to where we came in.

(Thanks to Tim Bengsch)

Yeah, you’d think Dick would realize that Gordon is capable of putting two and two together.

Now on his own, Batman ponders his next move (I hear Star City’s nice this time of year)

Meanwhile in Gordon’s office, Mayor Hill tries to get Gordon to stand down.

Since the public knows about Barbara’s connection to Batman…

Hill demands Gordon’s resignation.

Meanwhile, on Tabloid TV…

The assembled villains are suing Bruce Wayne for $1 billion!

...under the advice of the Dini-verse's version of Johnny Cochran.

Meanwhile, Gordon has to decide if he quietly resigns or fights the legal system.

With the clock ticking, Gordon goes to Blackgate Prison.

The convict in the shadows agrees to Gordon’s plan.

(Thanks to The World's Finest)

Oh, don’t tell me this was an “it’s all a dream” episode?!

I guess it was!

Turns out Batgirl got a lungful of the Scarecrow’s fear gas and it surfaced her worst fears in her mind.

Barbara decides that, to keep that nightmare scenario from happening, she would come clean to her father (though not reveal the rest of the Bat Family’s secrets)

That night, Barbara invites her father to dinner…and a talk.

Barbara tries to stammer out what she has to say, but is interrupted by Gordon.

So it is implied that Gordon might already know about Barbara…and possibly the others.

And with that, we fade out and credits roll

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Mitchell Armentrout and Fran Spielman at Chicago Sun-Times:

President Donald Trump’s Justice Department is suing Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson and Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle, accusing them of interfering with federal immigration enforcement as his administration pursues its mass deportation campaign. The federal lawsuit filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Chicago claims sanctuary policies in Illinois that bar local authorities from cooperating with the deportation effort are “exacerbating” a crisis at the U.S. southern border. Pritzker, Johnson and other leaders have vowed to uphold the state and city’s sanctuary status, meaning local authorities won’t assist federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement in tracking down immigrants without legal status. The Justice Department claims Illinois leaders have been “minimally enforcing — and oftentimes affirmatively thwarting” federal investigations, resulting in “countless criminals being released into Chicago who should have been held for immigration removal from the United States.” They want a court order barring state and local protections for immigrants.

“This national crisis underscores the vital importance of “[e]nforcing our Nation’s immigration laws,’” the suit states. “This action seeks to put an end to one State’s efforts to impede the Federal Government from doing that.” Immigrants without legal status have not accounted for a disproportionate number of crimes compared to the rest of the population, numerous studies have shown. The federal government is arguing state law and ordinances at the county and city level “are designed to and in fact interfere with and discriminate against the Federal Government’s enforcement of federal immigration law in violation of the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution.” Pritzker said the state’s TRUST Act, which prohibits local law enforcement from assisting with immigration enforcement, “has always been compliant with federal law and still is today.” “Unlike Donald Trump, Illinois follows the law,” Pritzker said in a statement. “Illinois will defend our laws that prioritize police resources for fighting crime while enabling state law enforcement to assist with arresting violent criminals. Instead of working with us to support law enforcement, the Trump Administration is making it more difficult to protect the public, just like they did when Trump pardoned the convicted January 6 violent criminals. We look forward to seeing them in court.” A spokesperson for the city Law Department said they were reviewing the suit. During a news conference Tuesday, Johnson said “local law enforcement will not double as federal agents.” “There is a clear separation there. That’s the only thing that this ordinance, essentially, lays out. So it’s not a mater of the police department not going after violent criminals,” Johnson said at that news conference. “While we’re talking about undocumented individuals, do you know how many illegal guns come through Chicago? That’s what the president of the United States of America can help me with.” At a Loop press conference Thursday, Preckwinkle said, “we’ll defend ourselves and hope for success in the court system... We’re going to fight back. We will pursue every legal opportunity to defend the programs that we believe in and defend our values.” The lawsuit also named Chicago Police Supt. Larry Snelling and Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart as defendants. CPD officials declined to comment. Dart’s office couldn’t immediately be reached.

[...]

Calls to cooperate

It’s been 40 years since Mayor Harold Washington issued an executive order declaring Chicago a “sanctuary city,” meaning undocumented people can access city services and live without fear of police harassment or city cooperation with federal immigration authorities. Last month, after a furious lobbying campaign by immigration rights advocates and their political champions, the City Council, without debate, voted 39-11 to table an attempt by two Hispanic alderpersons to restore the so-called “carve-outs” to the Welcoming City ordinance. The failed ordinance was led by Southwest Side colleagues Ray Lopez (15th) and Silvana Tabares (23rd), two of Mayor Brandon Johnson’s most outspoken critics. Those exceptions had been eliminated during former Mayor Lori Lightfoot’s administration. Illinois Republicans called Thursday on Democrats who control all levers of power in Springfield to repeal the TRUST Act.

The Tyrant 47-led DOJ files frivolous politically-motivated lawsuit against the City of Chicago and the State of Illinois and its leaders such as Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle, and Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson due to their righteous defense of sanctuary status for immigrants.

[portraitsofsaints]

Saint John Ogilvie

1579 - 1615

Feast Day: March 10

Patron of Scotland

Saint John Ogilvie was a Scottish Roman Catholic Jesuit martyr, born into a wealthy respected Calvinist family in 1579.  In the midst of the religious controversies and turmoil that engulfed Europe of that era, he decided to become a Roman Catholic. He joined the Society of Jesus and was ordained a priest in Paris in 1610. After ordination, he returned to Scotland in November 1613 disguised as a horse trader named John Watson, to minister to the few remaining Roman Catholics in the Glasgow area where it was illegal to preach or otherwise endorse Roman Catholicism. In 1614, he was betrayed and arrested in Glasgow, convicted of high treason for refusing to accept the King's spiritual jurisdiction, suffered terrible tortures and was hanged. 

Prints, plaques & holy cards available for purchase here: (website)

[haggishlyhagging]

As the theory of woman's wickedness gathered force, her representative place in the church lessened. From century to century restrictive canons multiplied and the clergy constantly grew more corrupt— although bearing bad reputation at an early date. Tertullian, whose heavy diatribes are to be found in large libraries, was bitter in his opposition to marriage. While it took many hundreds of years for the total exclusion of woman from the Christian priesthood, the celibacy of the clergy during this period was the constant effort of the church. Even during the ages that priestly marriage was permitted, celibates obtained a higher reputation for sanctity and virtue than married priests who, infinitely more than celibates were believed subject to infestation by demons.

The restriction upon clerical marriages proceeded gradually. First the superior holiness of the unmarried was taught, together with their greater freedom from infestation by demons. A single marriage only was next allowed, and that with a woman who had never before entered the relation. The council of A.D. 347, consisting of twenty-one bishops, forbade the ordination of those priests who had been twice married or whose wife had been a widow. A council of A.D. 395 ruled that a bishop who had children after ordination should be excluded from the major orders. The council of A.D. 444 deposed Chelidonius, Bishop of Besancon, for having married a widow. The council of Orleans (A.D. 511), consisting of thirty-two bishops, decided that monks who married should be expelled from the ecclesiastical order.

The church was termed the spouse of the priest. It was declared that Peter possessed a wife before his conversion but that he forsook her and all worldly things after he became Christ's, who established chastity. Priests were termed holy in proportion as they opposed marriage. The unmarried among the laity who had never entered that relation, and the married who forsook it, were regarded as saintly. So great was the opposition to marriage that a layman who married a second time was refused benediction and penance [was] imposed. A wife was termed "an unhallowed thing."

So far from celibacy producing chastity or purity of life, church restrictions upon marriage led to the most debasing crimes, the most revolting vices, the grossest immorality. As early as the fourth century (A.D. 370) the state attempted purification through a statute enacted by the emperors Valentinian, Valerius and Gratian, prohibiting ecclesiastics and monks from entering the houses of widows, single women living alone or girls who had lost their parents. The nearest ties of relationship proved ineffectual in protecting woman from priestly assault and incest became so common, it was found necessary to prohibit the residence of a priest's mother or sister in his house. This restriction was renewed at various times through the ages. The condemnation of the council of Rome (Easter, 1051) under the pontificate of Pope Leo IX, was not directed against married priests but against those who held incestuous relations.

Yet, although the church thus externally set her seal of disapprobation upon this vice, her general teaching sustained it. Gregory, Bishop of Venelli—convicted of this crime by the Council of Rome—was punished by excommunication but in a short time was restored to his former important position. The highest legates were equally guilty with the inferior priests. Cardinal John of Cremona, the pope's legate to the Council of Westminster (1125), sent by Pope Honorius for the express purpose of enforcing celibacy, became publicly notorious and disgraced and was obliged to hastily leave England in consequence of his teaching and his practice being diametrically opposed.

Through this clerical contempt of marriage, the conditions of celibacy and virginity were regarded as of the highest virtue. Jerome respected marriage as chiefly valuable in that it gave virgins to the church while Augustus, in acknowledging that marriage perpetuated the species, also contended that it also perpetuated original sin.

These diverse views in regard to marriage created the most opposite teaching from the church. By one class, the demand to increase and multiply was constantly brought up and women were taught that the rearing of children was their highest duty. The strangest sermons were sometimes preached toward the enforcement of this command. Others taught an entirely different duty for both men and women and a large celibate class was created under especial authority of the church. Women, especially those of wealth, were constantly urged to take upon themselves the vow of virginity, their property passing into possession of the church—thus helping to build up priestly power. Another class held the touch of a woman to be a contamination and to avoid it, holy men secluded themselves in caves and forests.

Through numerous decretals, confirmation was given to the theory that woman was defiled through the physical peculiarities of her being. Even her beauty was counted as an especial snare and temptation of the devil for which, in shame, she ought to do continual penance. Chrysostom, whose prayer is repeated at every Sunday morning service of the Episcopal Church, described women as a "necessary evil, a natural temptation, a desirable calamity, a domestic peril, a deadly fascination and a painted ill." But to escape her influence was impossible, and celibacy led to the most direful results. Monks and hermits acknowledged themselves tormented in their solitary lives by visions of beautiful women. Monasteries were visited by an illness to which celibacy imparted a name and impurity of body and soul spread throughout Christendom. The general tone of the church in regard to marriage, its creation of a double code of morality, its teaching of woman's greater sinfulness—together with that of her absolute subordination to man—subverted the moral character of the Christian world, within whose borders the vilest systems of immorality arose which the world has ever known, its extent being a subject of historical record.

-Matilda Joslyn Gage, Woman, Church and State

[darkmaga-returns]

President-elect Donald Trump’s border czar is warning sanctuary cities of dire consequences if they refuse to turn over illegal immigrants, saying he’ll seek Justice Department authority to charge officials with obstruction and harboring if they don’t turn over illegal border crossers in their custody. “They need to be aware of a couple things. No. 1, impeding a federal law enforcement officer is a crime. No. 2, if you knowingly harbor or conceal an illegal alien from ICE, that's a crime,” Tom Homan told Just the News in a wide-ranging interview. “So don't cross that line!” The former acting Director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement was named earlier this month by Trump to coordinate all border security issues from the White House starting Jan. 20. He has been crafting plans already.

Both the president-elect and Homan have been clear they intend to launch mass deportations of the more than 14 million illegal aliens believed to have entered the country during the Biden presidency, beginning with those who are accused or convicted of crimes.

Since then, some blue states and cities have announced they will resist the Trump administration’s effort when it begins in January. The city of Los Angeles, for instance, passed an ordinance last week affirming it is a sanctuary city, matching the state law that California first passed in 2017.

[dunilefra]

Admirable Articles of Philippines's Constitution

ARTICLE II. DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES AND STATE POLICIES PRINCIPLES (Part of it)

Sec 4

The prime duty of the Government is to serve and protect the people. The Government may call upon the people to defend the State and, in the fulfillment thereof, all citizens may be required, under conditions provided by law, to render personal military or civil service.

Sec 6

The separation of Church and State shall be inviolable.

Sec 9

The State shall promote a just and dynamic social order that will ensure the prosperity and independence of the nation and free the people from poverty through policies that provide adequate social services, promote full employment, a rising standard of living, and an improved quality of life for all.

Sec 15

The State shall protect and promote the right to health of the people and instill health consciousness among them.

Sec 26

The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service, and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.

ARTICLE III. BILL OF RIGHTS (Part of it)

Sec 3

The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of the court, or when public safety or order requires otherwise as prescribed by law.

Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding section shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding.

Sec 5

No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights.

Sec 21

No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense. If an act is punished by a law and an ordinance, conviction or acquittal under either shall constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same act.

ARTICLE V. SUFFRAGE (Part of it)

Sec 1

Suffrage may be exercised by all citizens of the Philippines not otherwise disqualified by law, who are at least eighteen years of age, and who shall have resided in the Philippines for at least one year and in the place wherein they propose to vote for at least six months immediately preceding the election. No literacy, property, or other substantive requirement shall be imposed on the exercise of suffrage.

ARTICLE VI. LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT (Part of it)

Sec 4

The term of office of the Senators shall be six years and shall commence, unless otherwise provided by law, at noon on the thirteenth day of June next following their election.

No Senator shall serve for more than two consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity of his service for the full term for which he was elected.

Sec 7

The Members of the House of Representatives shall be elected for a term of three years which shall begin, unless otherwise provided by law, at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following their election.

No Member of the House of Representatives shall serve for more than three consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity of his service for the full term for which he was elected.

Sec 10

The salaries of Senators and Members of the House of Representatives shall be determined by law. No increase in said compensation shall take effect until after the expiration of the full term of all the Members of the Senate and the House of Representatives approving such increase.

Sec 31

No law granting a title of royalty or nobility shall be enacted.

ARTICLE VII. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT (Part of it)

Sec 1

The executive power shall be vested in the President of the Philippines.

Sec 4

The President and the Vice-President shall be elected by direct vote of the people for a term of six years which shall begin at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following the day of the election and shall end at noon of the same date six years thereafter. The President shall not be eligible for any reelection. No person who has succeeded as President and has served as such for more than four years shall be qualified for election to the same office at any time.

No Vice-President shall serve for more than two successive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity of the service for the full term for which he was elected.

Sec 13

The President, Vice-President, the Members of the Cabinet, and their deputies or assistants shall not, unless otherwise provided in this Constitution, hold any other office or employment during their tenure. They shall not, during said tenure, directly or indirectly, practice any other profession, participate in any business, or be financially interested in any contract with, or in any franchise, or special privilege granted by the Government or any subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof, including government-owned or controlled corporations or their subsidiaries. They shall strictly avoid conflict of interest in the conduct of their office.

The spouse and relatives by consanguinity or affinity within the fourth civil degree of the President shall not during his tenure be appointed as Members of the Constitutional Commissions, or the Office of the Ombudsman, or as Secretaries, Undersecretaries, chairmen or heads of bureaus or offices, including government-owned or controlled corporations and their subsidiaries.

ARTICLE XII. NATIONAL ECONOMY AND PATRIMONY (Part of it)

Sec 1

The goals of the national economy are a more equitable distribution of opportunities, income, and wealth; a sustained increase in the amount of goods and services produced by the nation for the benefit of the people; and an expanding productivity as the key to raising the quality of life for all, especially the underprivileged.

The State shall promote industrialization and full employment based on sound agricultural development and agrarian reform, through industries that make full and efficient use of human and natural resources, and which are competitive in both domestic and foreign markets. However, the State shall protect Filipino enterprises against unfair foreign competition and trade practices.

In the pursuit of these goals, all sectors of the economy and all regions of the country shall be given optimum opportunity to develop. Private enterprises, including corporations, cooperatives, and similar collective organizations, shall be encouraged to broaden the base of their ownership.

Sec 17

In times of national emergency, when the public interest so requires, the State may, during the emergency and under reasonable terms prescribed by it, temporarily take over or direct the operation of any privately owned public utility or business affected with public interest.

Sec 18

The State may, in the interest of national welfare or defense, establish and operate vital industries and, upon payment of just compensation, transfer to public ownership utilities and other private enterprises to be operated by the Government.

Sec 19

The State shall regulate or prohibit monopolies when the public interest so requires. No combinations in restraint of trade or unfair competition shall be allowed.

ARTICLE XIII. SOCIAL JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS (Part of it)

Sec 12

The State shall establish and maintain an effective food and drug regulatory system and undertake appropriate health manpower development and research, responsive to the country's health needs and problems.

ARTICLE XVI. GENERAL PROVISIONS (Part of it)

Sec 5

Professionalism in the armed forces and adequate remuneration and benefits of its members shall be a prime concern of the State. The armed forces shall be insulated from partisan politics. No member of the military shall engage directly or indirectly in any partisan political activity, except to vote.

by Dunilefra, working for Fundamental Rights