Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Lennyjoe on July 28, 2010, 02:14:22 PM
-
http://www.foxnews.com/
Federal Judge Blocks Portions of Arizona Illegal Immigration Law
As for me, I figured it would turn out that way. But, I am glad Arizona gave it a go.
OK
-
So the judge struck down the law re papers and an illegal seeking work? Perhaps I badly misunderstand US laws, but I thought those were already crimes?
-
So the judge struck down the law re papers and an illegal seeking work? Perhaps I badly misunderstand US laws, but I thought those were already crimes?
Trying to enforce the law is a crime now. :mad:
-
Trying to enforce the law is a crime now. :mad:
Pretty much what I got out of the decision. Federal judge took the teeth out of it. How dare the states stand up to the .fed!
-
It'll be interesting to see what happens when SCOTUS finally gets a hold of this one. Because that's ultimately where it's gonna end up.
Frankly, I hope that it passes muster with SCOTUS. Because while it may have just been a minor inconvenience to the Obama admin. if this thing had been ruled ok by the fed. judge, it'll be a major black eye for them if SCOTUS tells them that it's legal.
-
I thought it said the judge put an injunction on certain parts of the law. It wasn't "struck down".
The thing that I found weird is that the judge also blocked a part of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times. I thought that was already a federal law and has been for years.
-
I thought it said the judge put an injunction on certain parts of the law. It wasn't "struck down".
The thing that I found weird is that the judge also blocked a part of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times. I thought that was already a federal law and has been for years.
It is part of title 8.
-
I wonder if Rahmbo or Holder called the judge???
-
A Fed ruled that Feds rule.
You expected otherwise?
Bolton confirmed that we have a Bubble-Wrapped Government.
-
I keep hearing opponents of the Arizona law say that it's the federal government's job to enforce immigration laws, and local law enforcement should stay out of it.
Kidnaping is a federal crime. I wonder if the AZ law opponents would be happy if local law enforcement declined to arrest any kidnappers they come across. What about polluters? If some company is dumping hundreds of barrels of chemicals into waterways, should the states just look the other way?
-
[flight of fancy]
We now have all the elements in place for a first class constitutional crisis. Any legal wrangling will work its way through the ninth circus court and then onto SCOTUS. All that is missing is someone at the state level pulling an Andrew Jackson and telling the court "enforce it". If the governor should do a Jackson and order LE to enforce the law as written it is a given FED.gov will ride to the court's rescue seeking to stop enforcement DURING A MID-TERM ELECTION. Plenty of teevee time. Lots of talking head talk. Acres of newsprint produced by state media seeking to buttress FED.gov's position. Talk radio would have hours and hours of programming. Surely the courts will eventually issue a final rule but not in time to stop the creation of a vivid demonstration of how statist behave.
[/flight of fancy]
-
Clinton appointee. We have become a nation of political factionalism, not law. This is exactly what the founders feared. Checks and balances won't work unless the President chooses federal judges by judging their Constitutional accuity rather than political consideration or agenda. The Senate should advise and consent to hold the President to this standard, not a political consideration or agenda. If the people are not careful who they send to the House and the Senate, pettifoggery will abound and has.
Frankin's words, "We have given you a Republic, if you can keep it" echoes through the ages.
The election this November is perhaps one of the most important in our lifetimes.
-
hmmm, so now all the medical pot laws are worthless? :angel: and for that matter the marriage laws some states have passed should be gone now. this just might get interesting. [popcorn]
-
So the judge struck down the law re papers and an illegal seeking work? Perhaps I badly misunderstand US laws, but I thought those were already crimes?
They are federal crimes, not state crimes, as per the constitution.
Rather, there's a good enough possibility that these are federal crimes and not state crimes that it makes sense to put a temporary hold on the law while we take the time to sort it all out.
I was pretty pissed about the ruling when I first heard it this afternoon. Now that I've taken some time to think it through, I don't have nearly as much problem with it.
-
So is the judge saying that local law can't do anything to me for violations of GCA68?
Not that I would get caught doing anything like that, but it is a Federal Law.
jim
-
So is the judge saying that local law can't do anything to me for violations of GCA68?
Not that I would get caught doing anything like that, but it is a Federal Law.
jim
The feds really don't want to enforce the law, but they can't repeal it, so they want to just ignore it and can't have AZ trying to enforce it for them.
-
I was just trying to set a precedence. ;)
jim
-
So it's Catch-22 time.
We can only enforce immigration law through the Feds.
But the Feds won't enforce immigration law.
Ah. Got it now...
-
I keep hearing opponents of the Arizona law say that it's the federal government's job to enforce immigration laws, and local law enforcement should stay out of it.
So what's keeping the federal government from doing its job ? If they had been doing their job, Arizona wouldn't have had to resort to these measures.
This is barry's fault.
-
So....I arrest you for DUI at an accident scene where you have demolished 3 cars, killed your passenger and the driver of one of the other cars. You are not injured. During the booking process, I find you have no driver's license, no other ID, LEIN has no wants or warrants or any record of you, and you can't speak English except to say your name; I'm not sure what language you speak.
What now, kemo sabe??
-
What's keeping the Feds from doing their job?
They like illegal aliens. Like 'em as prospective political bloc and voters; like 'em as cheap labor; like 'em as the new American population to replace the annoying and recalcitrant "legacy" population.
There is no way this administration is going to do ANYTHING serious about illegal immigration unless they get a plenary amnesty out of this.
-
My understanding is that the AZ law is "patterned" after the US law... even, I seem to recall, to using some of the same language...
<thinking, thinking>
... so if SCOTUS knocks down the AZ law, wouldn't that mean most of the fed law would also be unconstitutional...?
<mulling it over, mulling it over>
...so if the fed law is also unconstitutional, doesn't that knock down just about all of our illegal alien laws....?
<rubbing chin, rubbing chin>
...so wouldn't that be a back-door way to achieve...?
<searches for word, searches for word>
... total immigration amnesty...
Nah. Won't happen....
I'm just an old coot who's seen so many political subterfuges in my lifetime that I've become suspicious of anything a politician does. Call it paranoia. I'm entitled. Besides, it's a State's rights issue anyhow....
<scratches balding pate, scratches balding pate>
...may end up calling it the War Of Eastern Aggression, if it ever comes to that.
Terry, 230RN
-
Be careful with the Animal House Defense.
What I heard mentioned today was that the judge basically said that not only is federal immigration law in the purview of the Feds, but that the federal policy of non-enforcement is also a federal monopoly and the state can't buck that non-enforcement policy by enforcing it on its own. That might be a stretch, but it seems to fit.
-
... so if SCOTUS knocks down the AZ law, wouldn't that mean most of the fed law would also be unconstitutional...?
As I understand it, no. A big part of the issue is not what to enforce, but who to enforce it. Immigration is an enumerated federal power, not a state power, and AZ is probably acting outside it's authority by trying to enforce it.
I think all the guff about racial profiling, and failure of the feds to do their job, and all of the rest, it just misses the point. This is an issue of federalism, of distributed powers, and of one entity trying to claim for itself the powers of the other.
-
What's keeping the Feds from doing their job?
They like illegal aliens. Like 'em as prospective political bloc and voters; like 'em as cheap labor; like 'em as the new American population to replace the annoying and recalcitrant "legacy" population.
There is no way this administration is going to do ANYTHING serious about illegal immigration unless they get a plenary amnesty out of this.
I realize that. I'm less certain why his predecessor did nothing, either.
I guess my question was directed less to the folks here and more a demand to the federal government: they won't do anything, but they object when the states take action.
-
The issue is that this nation is being invaded.
The rest is legal playtime. Bolton dealt with "the law" as if the on-the-ground realities did not exist. As if the Federal Government operated responsibly and in good faith. As if there were no significant threat to the citizens of Arizona from massive illegal immigration. Who, really, is being harmed and who needs to be protected by a preliminary injunction? Let's get real about the context in which all of this is occurring. "They" want an amnesty; the rest is just a slow adagio.
-
Sorry, man, the invasion isn't the issue. Why they are invading us, and why the politicians are playing fast and loose with the Constitiution and the law....that is the real issue. The ability to build a tyrannical majority that can vote for more stuff from the minority, that is the real issue, and exactly why we are in the immigration boat we're in. It is by design.
-
I meant the real issue in Arizona, not the whole schmeer. We're not in disagreement about the whole of it. My point was that the preliminary injunction was a travesty because the people Bolton needed to protect from immediate harm were the citizens of Arizona.
-
The ability to build a tyrannical majority that can vote for more stuff from the minority, that is the real issue
[Connery]What are you prepared to do about it[/Connery]
Anybody going to Galt's Gulch?