Advertisement

Register for free to remove this ad

Originally Posted by IRHari Fed'l Gov't: It's the fed'l gov't's job to address immigration. Arizona: We have a right to protect our citizens. Wow, that's some legal argument guys. Note that these summaries are the ones I hear the most about each side of the lawsuit.

And how do sanctuary cities have a legal argument for disregarding federal law?

Originally Posted by fullmetalfan720 And how do sanctuary cities have a legal argument for disregarding federal law?

There isn't one, but is the federal government providing money to enforce it?

Originally Posted by fullmetalfan720 And how do sanctuary cities have a legal argument for disregarding federal law?

Tell me.

Originally Posted by KingBroly We all know there's no use bitching about it until the Supreme Court rules on it.

Probably right.

Originally Posted by fatherofcaitlyn There isn't one, but is the federal government providing money to enforce it?

No they aren't, but I do believe nullification of federal law is something that is frowned upon, and that it usually ends up with federal troops in the area that tries it. I almost wonder why that isn't happening now.

Originally Posted by IRHari Tell me.

There isn't.

I find it rather hypocritical that it seems to be:
"They're setting up check points in Arizona to get those poor brown people, that's horrible and racist!"
and yet
http://www.chp.ca.gov/html/dui-en.html

The CHP maintains these checkpoints (sobriety check points) to reduce the number of drunk drivers on our highways and diminish the amount of pain, suffering and death that result from drunk driving.

"That's all fine and dandy."

One of the dumbass republican candidates running for governor here wants to make it law that everyone (yeah, right) stopped by the police will have to prove citizenship.

So look out you whiter than white folks, you better have proof you're a citizen.

Originally Posted by Clak One of the dumbass republican candidates running for governor here wants to make it law that everyone (yeah, right) stopped by the police will have to prove citizenship. So look out you whiter than white folks, you better have proof you're a citizen.

See, now that's patently unconstitutional. But so is having warrantless checkpoints. And yet no one seems to be complaining about that phenomena.

I guess I dont understand this whole thing. Someone is trying to keep ILLEGAL immigrants out, call me crazy but isnt illegal here the key word? If they want the benefits of the country then why dont they become legal?

Personally they should check for citizenship when they do stops and all that other stuff.

Im all for people coming to america for a better life and so on, but ing do it the right way. Dont cross the border and pop out a kid so you can become a 2nd hand citizen. Learn how to speak english, pay your taxes, learn how america works and I wont care.

Were gonna pussify ourselves into obsoletion with all this kind of crap, I dont mean just the immigration thing but I mean all this politically correct, feel good, everyone needs to poke their nose into everyones else business and trying to make everyone happy horseshit. Thank god we didnt have people like this back when our country was new, we would have all died from starvation because we would have been to busy bitching about stupid and being to much of a united states of pansies to do anything.

Yeah sometimes choices like this arent nice ones to make but sometimes you have to do things for the greater good. And Im sorry but all the probablly millions of illegal aliens in this country throw the whole system out of whack. They run up free healthcare which makes it harder on us citizens. For instance I worked security at a shipping center and we had alot of mexicans there, couple there I talked to dont bother paying for insurance through the company because they got everything free, were telling me they all did that there. And most of them spend a little money but send most of it back home so its not even like its going back into our system. And yes they take jobs, I know it sounds stupid but they do take alot of jobs because they work for nothing because the money when taken back home is worth alot more, I dont blame compnies for hiring them as they save alot of money because americans need more money because the cost of living here is 4 times that of mexico. And then the country has anti immigration stuff that is only for show and nothing is actually done about it, so all we do is waste tax payer money. Illegal aliens is a small problem but its still a problem and when you have to many little problems going on then its hard to get out from under them all unless you just take charge and handle it one way or another.

Originally Posted by Clak One of the dumbass republican candidates running for governor here wants to make it law that everyone (yeah, right) stopped by the police will have to prove citizenship. So look out you whiter than white folks, you better have proof you're a citizen.

Yeah they already check, its a drivers license and if you dont have one a public id can be obtained quite easily. There isnt a excuse for not being able to check for citizenship. I know the public id thing isnt technically anything, but with a minor change to the requirements of having one it wouldnt be a problem and they only cost a couple dollars.

Originally Posted by KingBroly We all know there's no use bitching about it until the Supreme Court rules on it.

I understand that there needs to be due process and all that.

But sometimes, I almost wish there was a way to just move a case directly to the Supreme Court.

It doesn't much matter how any of this plays out in any of the lower courts. It's all going to end up there. Meanwhile, both Arizona state and the Federal government will be burning away wheel barrels of taxpayer dollars...

I think Arizona should take the Obama method of handling court decisions. If the court strikes you down, just make the same law over again. If they strike you down a second time, make the law again. Damn courts shouldn't stop our elected officials from doing what they decide is best for us.

Originally Posted by gargus I guess I dont understand this whole thing. Someone is trying to keep ILLEGAL immigrants out, call me crazy but isnt illegal here the key word? If they want the benefits of the country then why dont they become legal?

Because it is incredibly difficult, time-consuming, and expensive to become a legal US citizen. And in a lot of cases, it is flat-out impossible.

http://reason.com/blog/2008/09/24/ne...ke-flynn-shikh

I think of the Lily Ledbetter case Bob, what else you got?

Originally Posted by ElwoodCuse Because it is incredibly difficult, time-consuming, and expensive to become a legal US citizen. And in a lot of cases, it is flat-out impossible. http://reason.com/blog/2008/09/24/ne...ke-flynn-shikh

flat out impossible and yet millions do it every year, and we still bring in more legal immigrants than any other country. Are you arguing for an open border? Or are you arguing for an increase in legal immigration? The latter would most likely still end up denying quite a few people, and we would still have illegal immigration. So it would be nice for some people, but it isn't a solution to the illegal immigration problem.

Originally Posted by IRHari I think of the Lily Ledbetter case Bob, what else you got?

Lilly Ledbetter?
Not sure I get the reference you're making...

Originally Posted by Knoell flat out impossible and yet millions do it every year, and we still bring in more legal immigrants than any other country. Are you arguing for an open border? Or are you arguing for an increase in legal immigration? The latter would most likely still end up denying quite a few people, and we would still have illegal immigration. So it would be nice for some people, but it isn't a solution to the illegal immigration problem.

Regardless of whether or not you think there's a practical way to make it easier for them to come legally, the reason why they come illegally is because they can't easily come legally.

So "why don't they just come legally?!!?!" is a stupid question. They would if it was really that easy, obviously. Not that you shouldn't basically just ignore everything that gargus says anyway, and anyone who ever uses the word "pussify."

Originally Posted by Knoell flat out impossible and yet millions do it every year, and we still bring in more legal immigrants than any other country. Are you arguing for an open border? Or are you arguing for an increase in legal immigration? The latter would most likely still end up denying quite a few people, and we would still have illegal immigration. So it would be nice for some people, but it isn't a solution to the illegal immigration problem.

The border can't be secured for free. Nobody who wants to secure the border wants to pay for it.

Originally Posted by fullmetalfan720 And how do sanctuary cities have a legal argument for disregarding federal law?

State and local enforcement is not required to ENFORCE federal law. It's one of those areas that is pretty fluid, but there is some precedent for both sides.

Even though Congress has never authorized state police officers to make arrest for federal offenses without an arrest warrant, such arrests occur routinely; and the Supreme Court has recognized that state law controls the validity of such an arrest. As the Court concluded in United States v. Di Re, "No act of Congress lays down a general federal rule for arrest without warrant for federal offenses. None purports to supersede state law. And none applies to this arrest which, while for a federal offense, was made by a state officer accompanied by federal officers who had no power of arrest. Therefore the New York statute provides the standard by which this arrest must stand or fall." 332 U.S. 581, 591 (1948). The Court’s conclusion presupposes that state officers possess the inherent authority to make warrantless arrests for federal offenses. The same assumption guided the Court in Miller v. United States. 357 U.S. 301, 305 (1958). As the Seventh Circuit has explained, "[state] officers have implicit authority to make federal arrests." U.S. v. Janik, 723 F.2d 537, 548 (7th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, they may initiate an arrest on the basis of probable cause to think that an individual has committed a federal crime. Id.

So really the argument of whether entities other than federal can arrest on suspicion of violating federal law is pretty settled. What is also pretty settled though is that state and local governments are sovereign. Therefore, they also have the ability to choose not to.

So yea. States and cities can pick and choose, though most federal crimes have a state equivalent (like bank robbery, etc.) so the state will go after them. Immigration is in that gray area because it is specifically reserved for the feds. Which is why many elements of the Arizona law are unconstitutional and will be repealed (unless the Supremes want to completely disregard 200 years of case law that say so).

What's fun is that now conservatives are 100% hoping for judicial activism on their behalf. Not that they ever particularly gave a shit about philosophical consistency, but one hopes that maybe another one or two decent American conservative souls will see this and realize that they're full of shit and adjust accordingly.

Originally Posted by SpazX Regardless of whether or not you think there's a practical way to make it easier for them to come legally, the reason why they come illegally is because they can't easily come legally. So "why don't they just come legally?!!?!" is a stupid question. They would if it was really that easy, obviously. Not that you shouldn't basically just ignore everything that gargus says anyway, and anyone who ever uses the word "pussify."

So you are arguing for no limit for legal immigration? If someone wants to come in let em in? It is not about the "why don't they come legally" question.

Obviously theres waits, and you may never get in, but that does not mean we should look the other way to people who do come in illegally. Either let everyone in, or raise the limits if it is unfair, why should the people on those waiting lists not be able to get in, while people who break the law are perfectly fine? If you raise the limits, people will still be denied entry, and come illegally so what happens then? Why not secure the border, give amnesty to most illegals, and then after determining our population status and its effects, raise or lower the legal immigration amounts.

Originally Posted by fatherofcaitlyn The border can't be secured for free. Nobody who wants to secure the border wants to pay for it.

Why not put the military to work on the borders? It would be excellent training, and they can handle it.

Edit: I better say I realize the military still costs money, but I am sure we can figure out something, if we can figure out how to spend 4 trillion dollars in 2 years.

As someone who is in the middle of dealing with legal immigration on a personal level, I can attest that the entire system needs to be overhauled - it's beyond ridiculous. Much of the process is downright unethical and tyranical.

But you stop the leak in the boat before you build another boat. It all needs an overhaul; it needs to be scraped and rebuilt, but it's retarded to think we need to have a fix-all for every aspect of the immigration problem before we do anything - which is the Democrats standpoint.

Originally Posted by gargus I guess I dont understand this whole thing. Someone is trying to keep ILLEGAL immigrants out, call me crazy but isnt illegal here the key word? If they want the benefits of the country then why dont they become legal? Personally they should check for citizenship when they do stops and all that other stuff. Im all for people coming to america for a better life and so on, but ing do it the right way. Dont cross the border and pop out a kid so you can become a 2nd hand citizen. Learn how to speak english, pay your taxes, learn how america works and I wont care. Were gonna pussify ourselves into obsoletion with all this kind of crap, I dont mean just the immigration thing but I mean all this politically correct, feel good, everyone needs to poke their nose into everyones else business and trying to make everyone happy horseshit. Thank god we didnt have people like this back when our country was new, we would have all died from starvation because we would have been to busy bitching about stupid and being to much of a united states of pansies to do anything. Yeah sometimes choices like this arent nice ones to make but sometimes you have to do things for the greater good. And Im sorry but all the probablly millions of illegal aliens in this country throw the whole system out of whack. They run up free healthcare which makes it harder on us citizens. For instance I worked security at a shipping center and we had alot of mexicans there, couple there I talked to dont bother paying for insurance through the company because they got everything free, were telling me they all did that there. And most of them spend a little money but send most of it back home so its not even like its going back into our system. And yes they take jobs, I know it sounds stupid but they do take alot of jobs because they work for nothing because the money when taken back home is worth alot more, I dont blame compnies for hiring them as they save alot of money because americans need more money because the cost of living here is 4 times that of mexico. And then the country has anti immigration stuff that is only for show and nothing is actually done about it, so all we do is waste tax payer money. Illegal aliens is a small problem but its still a problem and when you have to many little problems going on then its hard to get out from under them all unless you just take charge and handle it one way or another. Yeah they already check, its a drivers license and if you dont have one a public id can be obtained quite easily. There isnt a excuse for not being able to check for citizenship. I know the public id thing isnt technically anything, but with a minor change to the requirements of having one it wouldnt be a problem and they only cost a couple dollars.

Uh, you did read where i said everyone STOPPED, right? I never said stopped while driving only. You realize that this is akin to asking for your papers, right? Does that sound familiar to you at all?

Originally Posted by Clak Uh, you did read where i said everyone STOPPED, right? I never said stopped while driving only. You realize that this is akin to asking for your papers, right? Does that sound familiar to you at all?

When involved with criminal activity, police can ask you for identification can't they? What's the difference? All you guys can come up with is that police might abuse it.

Originally Posted by thrustbucket it's retarded to think we need to have a fix-all for every aspect of the immigration problem before we do anything - which is the Democrats standpoint.

1) Classy use of the word 'retarded.' Real classy.

2) Cool Bro.