HeyBub wrote:
The Daring Dufas wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
The Daring Dufas wrote:
You mean there are provisions to force the enforcer to enforce
the law?! What an interesting and forceful use of the force of
law against law enforcement.................... My head hurts.

Yes. There are things called "sanctuary cities" where, by edict, the
city refuses to enforce applicable laws. San Francisco got hit last
year by a court order demanding it turn over to ICE juveniles found
to be felony violators. Prior to that, these gang members, et al,
were told to go forth and sin no more.


Is that what a Writ of Mandamus is used for?


Um, yeah. A Writ of Mandamus is a command by a court for a public official
to perform his statutory duty.

The sanction, of course, is contempt of court and the official will be
placed in a jail until he complies with the order of the court.

Most criminal laws state that an official will do "such and such" but there
is no penalty should the official decline to perform his duty. That's where
the mandamus business latches in.

The difference in the new Arizona law is that failure to follow the law is
itself a violation of law and the chap who neglects to follow the law can be
arrested.



Hasn't that been tried in relation to immigration law? I gave
up years ago trying to get government officials to do their
jobs. I reported to the FBI a crime committed by a LEO. The
agents did their job, investigated and told me that yes the
LEO did commit a crime. The FBI agents reported their findings
to The US Attorney who's response was "We don't consider it
a serious enough crime so we won't prosecute." I asked for a
list of federal crimes that were not serious enough to prosecute
so I could make it known to everyone but the feds declined my
request. Funny thing happened some years later when a LEO
political candidate did the same thing when he investigated
voter fraud, it suddenly became a serious crime for which the
LEO was prosecuted and imprisoned. Strange how that works.

TDD