Open Borders Fraud Paul Penzone
From his election website:
In November 2016, Paul Penzone defeated Joe Arpaio by nearly 13 points and immediately began to fulfill his campaign promise to renew, restore and refocus the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office. Sheriff Penzone remains committed to modern, transparent and accountable public safety and fiscal management that ensures our county is among the safest in the nation.
There is no mention of illegal aliens, but the undercurrent of the campaign against America's Sheriff, Joe Arpaio, was that Penzone would be the illegal alien sheriff. And Penzone did not waste time aiding his real constituents, illegal aliens.
PHOENIX - For years, immigrants being released from jails in Phoenix would routinely be kept locked up an extra couple days to give federal authorities time to check their immigration status and launch deportation proceedings.
It was a policy put in place by Sheriff Joe Arpaio and widely denounced by critics who cited it as a pattern of unfair treatment toward immigrants. Jail systems in other cities have also faced legal challenges contending it's unconstitutional to keep a person in jail after they're released on bail or complete their sentence.
The man who defeated Arpaio in the November election announced Friday night that he was doing away with the policy amid questions about its constitutionality. That means the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office will no longer keep immigrants past their release dates, putting more of the onus on Immigration, Customs and Enforcement officers.
"I have an obligation that this office act constitutionally and within the laws," Penzone said at a news conference.
Penzone said the Maricopa County Attorney's Office informed him of the legal issues surrounding policy, and he responded by doing away with the practice.
[Maricopa County Sheriff Paul Penzone Changes Jail Rule For Immigrants, AP/ABC15, February 17, 2017]
Penzone claims that it is settled law that detaining illegal aliens on behalf of DHS is unconstitutional. That is not settle law, and there have been no decisions in an Federal District Court in Arizona, nor has the Ninth Circuit Court Of Appeals made any ruling on the issue. There have been scattered decisions in some District Courts, but those do not have legal precedence for Arizona, especially since no Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court have made decisions. More importantly, the Obama Department of Justice have not appealed those decisions, hoping to end detentions by local law enforcement by not appealing those decisions, part of the Obama Regime Administrative Amnesty. Obviously that will change with Attorney General Jefferson Beauregard Sessions.
So the claim that what Penzone strangely calls "courtesy holds" on illegal aliens are illegal or unconstitutional is not settled. So, there is no precedent against holds and all precedent is actually in favor or holds. Furthermore, there is that strange terminology that Penzone uses, "courtesy holds." That is something new created by the radical left, much like "New Americans" or "Americans in waiting" to refer to illegal aliens. It is Orwellian Newspeak at its worse, political language designed to obscure rather than inform.
In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defence of the indefensible … Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness … the great enemy of clear language is insincerity. Where there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms...
[Politics And The English Language, George Orwell, 1946]
The "courtesy holds" that Penzone refers to are legal acts by a component of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), using DHS Form I-247, Immigration Detainer, that establishes probable cause that the alien in question is in the United States unlawfully or otherwise subject to arrest by DHS. It is not a "courtesy," but a legal process that is part of the authority of immigration officers to arrest and detain illegal aliens without need to obtain an arrest warrant from a Federal judge or magistrate codified in Title 8, United States Code, Section 1357, Powers Of Immigration Officers:
(a) Powers without warrant: Any officer or employee of the Service authorized under regulations prescribed by the Attorney General shall have power without warrant—
(2) to arrest any alien who in his presence or view is entering or attempting to enter the United States in violation of any law or regulation made in pursuance of law regulating the admission, exclusion, expulsion, or removal of aliens, or to arrest any alien in the United States, if he has reason to believe that the alien so arrested is in the United States in violation of any such law or regulation and is likely to escape before a warrant can be obtained for his arrest, but the alien arrested shall be taken without unnecessary delay for examination before an officer of the Service having authority to examine aliens as to their right to enter or remain in the United States;
In an Orwellian abuse of political language, while he was releasing illegal aliens to prey on the people of Maricopa County and Arizona, Penzone cried that none of this was his fault, but begged John Kelly, Secretary of DHS to solve the problem for him by magic.
Maricopa County Sheriff Paul Penzone is asking for guidance from the director of the Department of Homeland Security about "courtesy detainers" for suspected immigration-law violators and other areas of immigration enforcement.
Penzone, in a letter sent Thursday afternoon to DHS Secretary John Kelly, said he wanted his agency to be strong on issues of crime, including illegal immigration, but said, "I will not violate the law or the constitution so the ends justify the means."
On Friday, Penzone ended the longstanding practice of "courtesy holds" on the advice of the Maricopa County Attorney's Office. Because of a threat of litigation, Penzone said, the county jails immediately would end the practice of detaining suspected immigration-law violators for ICE officials for up to 48 hours after a criminal court judge had ordered their release on a state charge.
[Penzone To Homeland Security: Give Me A 'Responsible, Ethical And Legal Solution' On Holding Migrants, by Garrett Mitchell, The Arizona Republic, February 23, 2017]
Those, of course, are nothing more than crocodile tears. Penzone wanted to release illegal aliens, but he was under no legal obligation to do so. And his appeals to Kelly were disingenuous. One would think that a Sheriff would know that the appeal of decisions of law involving the United States are handled by the Attorney General. In any event though, Penzone did not even bother to review the detainers themselves, which showed the constitutional standard to hold a person, probable cause, was met.
But he did expose the fact that both AG Sessions and Secretary Kelly are stunningly silent on the issue. Neither has spoken in public to assert that detainers are legal, nor has Sessions immediately ordered Justice Department lawyers to appeal the outstanding cases. Very disturbing indeed.
However, the outcry from the public forced Penzone into the modified limited walkback.
Maricopa County Sheriff Paul Penzone said Friday evening his agency would begin transferring departing inmates potentially in violation of U.S. immigration law to federal officers within the walls of the county's jails.
The announcement settles the main point of contention in a week long stalemate between the Sheriff’s Office and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
[Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office Reverses Course, Will Allow ICE Agents To Pick Up Migrants Inside Jails, by Megan Cassidy, The Arizona Republic, February 24, 2017]
The success of public pressure on this open borders fanatic however does not relieve the ongoing failure of Secretary Kelly to begin to address the problem of illegal immigration and criminal aliens in particular, nor does it relieve Attorney General Sessions of his responsibility to publicly address the issue with a firm statement that detainers are legal and constitutional.