Preemption? Doesn’t the Federal Government have an obligation to do something before they preempt the states?
After two absolutely brutal days of taking the bar exam, there is nothing that immediately comes to mind that I would like to do less than look through a judgment from a temporary restraining order to the Arizona immigration law, but this is pretty much all anyone is discussing. On the off chance you’ve spent the last few days hiding in a cave or watching reruns of Big Bang Theory, here’s the video of the issue:
Now, bear in mind that this is a temporary injunction, and is not a final determination. The judge is essentially saying that she believes the Government (arguing against the Arizona Law) has a chance of prevailing when a full determination is made, and thus it is appropriate to block implementation.
Giving you the legal mumbo jumbo, (via HotAir):
For these reasons, the United States has demonstrated that it is likely to succeed on its claim that the mandatory immigration verification upon arrest requirement contained in Section 2(B) of S.B. 1070 is preempted by federal law. This requirement, as stated above, is likely to burden legally-present aliens, in contravention of the Supreme Court’s directive in Hines that aliens not be subject to “the possibility of inquisitorial practices and police surveillance.” 312 U.S. at 74. Further, the number of requests that will emanate from Arizona as a result of determining the status of every arrestee is likely to impermissibly burden federal resources and redirect federal agencies away from the priorities they have established.
This is the part that strikes me as so utterly absurd. I’ve had to show my drivers license about 30 times in the past couple of weeks alone. I had to show one when I flew to San Antonio; I had to show one when I went in to take the Bar Exam; I showed one to buy some Sudafed; and I even had to show one when I went to the bookstore the other day to verify that my unsigned credit card was actually mine. Is it really so onerous to check it? Can you imagine going on vacation to Belize or Turkey or Yemen and just running around without your passport on you? While I’ve never actually seen the inside of a Turkish prison, I would probably play it safe and carry the thing strapped to the inside of my calf anyway.
Again, according to the portions at HotAir,
In combination with the impermissible burden this provision will place on lawfully-present aliens, the burden on federal resources and priorities also leads to an inference of preemption. Therefore, for the purposes of preliminary injunction analysis, the Court concludes that the United States has demonstrated a likelihood of success on its challenge to the first sentence of Section 2(B). Section 2(B) in its entirety is likely preempted by federal law.
Frankly, the preemption part does make some sense. Preemption is the doctrine which
derives from the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution which states that the “Constitution and the laws of the United States…shall be the supreme law of the land…anything in the constitutions or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.” This means of course, that any federal law–even a regulation of a federal agency–trumps any conflicting state law.
Now, is the Arizona law in conflict with the federal ones? Not that I see, but I haven’t honestly researched as much as I could. But, as noted on a website which discusses the Constitution, show me where Immigration is a congressional function in the Constitution. Don’t waste your time:
The Constitution never mentions immigration, so how is it that the rules for immigrants, and quotas from countries, are set by the federal government and not by the state governments? After all, as the 10th Amendment states, are the powers not delegated to the United States held by the states, or the people?
The Supreme Court has ruled that the Congressional power to regulate naturalization, in Article 1, Section 8, includes the power to regulate immigration (see, for example, Hampton v. Mow Sun Wong, 426 U.S. 88 [1976]). It would not make sense to allow Congress to pass laws to determine how an immigrant becomes a naturalized resident if the Congress cannot determine how that immigrant can come into the country in the first place.
There is also an argument that immigration is an implied power of any sovereign nation, and as such, the federal government has the power to regulate immigration because the United States is a sovereign nation. While it is true that the United States is a sovereign nation, and it may be true that all sovereign nations have some powers inherent in that status, it is not necessary to determine if immigration is such a power that does not even require constitutional mention, because the Naturalization Clause handles the power.
If you want to explore this in any detail, there is a great blog called The Federalist Blog that discusses this in greater detail than I can cover here. Please feel free to read it.
The Legion has long had positions on immigration, and just this week Commander Hill had a rather lengthy statement regarding the issue of Amnesty, part of which read:
Albert Einstein defined insanity as “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”
While the great scientist was himself a legal immigrant to, and later a citizen of, the United States, it doesn’t take a genius of Einstein’s intellect to know that America’s immigration policy over the last several decades has been broken and the federal government has been derelict in its responsibility to fix it.
While the Obama administration says it’s committed to “immigration reform,” Americans are rightly concerned that this reform is merely a euphemism for amnesty. When President Reagan signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., said, “This amnesty will give citizenship to only 1.3 million illegal aliens. We will secure the borders henceforth. We will never again bring forth an amnesty bill like this.”
The senator was right. Today’s amnesty proposals are even worse. They are worse because the population of illegal aliens has skyrocketed to between 10 million and 20 million, depending on whose figures you choose to believe.
I agree of course with everything that the Commander says here, but what strikes me as completely absurd about this is that preemption comes in when the Feds occupy an area of law, and a state law is contrary to it. As far as I can tell, the feds are doing virtually nothing.
Either way, you can expect this to play HUGE in the coming elections, as Chris Matthews noted:
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
As for the young ladies bearing the signs at the top of this post……wow. I don’t even know where to begin with that one. I guess one question would be, how far back in history should we be going to set sovereign boundaries?
This entry was posted on Thursday, July 29th, 2010 at 1014 and is filed under the burner. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
What I found “on the books” as part of the FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAWS.
“Every alien, eighteen years of age and over, shall at all times carry with him and have in his personal possession any certificate of alien registration or alien registration receipt card issued to him pursuant to 8 USC § 1304. Any alien who fails to comply with the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall upon conviction for each offense be fined not to exceed $100 or be imprisoned not more than 30 days, or both.”
Where is our government! We Arizonians fear for our lives. We have to pack a concealed weapon for a sense of security. For what the ‘bad people’ have, our defense is very little. These ‘bad people’ are by definition, are Terrorists! There are areas of Southern Arizona in a National Recreation Areas, where we are told by local officials, to stay out for our own safety and protection. What is wrong with this picture? We are Americans and can’t safely go in remote areas of our country for fear of our lives? How many Americans must die form these acts of violence before our leaders wake up? The State of Arizona recognize the problem, but Washington DC wants to look the other way. Does our Congress, President, etc, live under a rock? Wake up! We go to other countries and help protect non-Americans from terrorist threats. How about our back yard? Arizona can’t do it all. Help us America from Terrorists in our back yard.
Donald L Carlson
SSgt USAF (ret)
The problem is not with legal aliens who are required to carry their so-called “Greencard” at all times, the problem is with Hispanics who are U.S. citizens and are therefore not required to carry proof of citizenship. Under the Arizona law a Mexican-American who is a U.S. citizen may be asked to show ‘papers’ and when they can’t they may be arrested. Whatever you want to say this is racial profiling. It is highly improbable that a caucasian would ever be asked the show they are in the country legally. In my opinion the phrase ’secure the border’ has no meaning because its an impossible task to absolutely secure a 2000 mile border. Neither Republicicans or Democrats acknowledge the real solution which is to go after employers who hire illegals. Remove the incentive to cross the border illegally and the problem will be solved. Of course to go after employers would have significant negative economic impact, especailly in the border states.
If a state can establish its own immigration laws, what’s to stop Oregon or California from opening its borders to all comers, no restrictions, walk right in?
Folks, our PROBLEM is that we have elected officials who REFUSE to take ANY kind of meaningful action because of the “extremists” on both sides of the isle. President Bush proposed something reasonable, but it wasn’t 100% agreeable to a majority. Why were they unwilling to accept 90%? For the same reason nothing today passes the Senate — one party wants to “prove” the other something or another…while you and I wait for them to take action.
IMHO, the only way our nation survives the political nonsense of the last 20-years is a constitutional TERM LIMITS amendment. Or, we have to find a way to encourage our citizenry to get themselves sufficiently educated on politics to throw out those who are not part of the solution. When do I expect either? Unfortunately, not in my lifetime.
Democrats and Republicans need to stop blaming each other for the past and start paying attention to finding honest compromise to at least START solving our problems. We need to hold those bubbas accountable!
The Arizona imigration law is driven by hatred and racism. Pure and simple. I believe amnesty in certain cases are certainly justifiend. I agree criminals (criminal records) should not have amnesty. However, your position that amnesty is not an option because of the terroist risk is a bunch a bull!! You are gereralizing and pooling eveyone in the same category. Shamefu!! Any law, policy, directive, regulation etc.. that targets and imposes racial profiling is WRONG!!! Doing so because of color, race or gender moral standing to a low point. I travel around the world and can tell you, the reaction is against Americans that favor this. They think we are spoiled, too hollywood and have to look good and be perfect. Our morality and decency has gone to shit! I favor a much needed immigration policy. The influx has to stop. Social programs can not sustain the needs of illegals. Although, as a fair and decent couintry we have to respect the serious needs of children and seniors. The policy has to be fair, concise, and respectfult. The intellects have to drive this effort, not the racist haters. All sides need to be part of developing this policy.
The immigration problem has two reasons for not being FIXED! First the Democrats want the votes and the other is the Republicans want cheap labor. And to add to the problem, Big Business and Special Intrest Groups buy off both sides. I agree,Congressional term limitation would help solve the problem. The U. S. non political pleople have to fix the problem. Period!!!
In reviewing history, there are those that say history does not repeat itself and those that think it does. For example, if you review those that are active in the Tea Bagger movement (by statements and class) you may find they sound like the 1939 citizens of Russia, Germany, Spain and Italy. Some of our greatest servicemen were immigrants. The largest number of Medal of Honor recipiants were Hispanic. The building of major parts of the country were done by immigrants. Even now the report is that about 5,000 people from Ireland are immigrating again.
It bothers me that such a great organization as the American Legion seems to support views that violate our constitution. Although, the Legion has been a great asset for vets, vets have honor because of the people and they are, frequently, not citizens as yet. Those that came to be with us have been a major part of making America a great country.
Paul did indeed hit on the two reasons this is not being resolved. Because of this inaction this is clear that both Congress and the President have violated their oaths of office in not obeying and enforcing the laws of the United States. All members of Congress and the President need to go back and read those oaths. Trust is a fragile thing and the people of this country are fast losing trust in Washington over this very matter. Unlike many laws, our immigration laws are not complicated – there are legal ways to come into this country and there are clearly illegal ways. Before we do anything, we need to enforce the laws which are on the books. We don’t need new laws, just enforce the ones we have.
It’s up to Congress, if the President doesn’t enforce the laws then he should be impeached.
“The largest number of Medal of Honor recipiants were Hispanic.”
a) have a source on that?
b) what does race have to do with the discussion?
There’s is a huge difference between race and nationality.
88 African Americans have received the MOH.
44 Hispanic recipients.
This website claims 258 were born in Ireland.
http://www.irishcentral.com/roots/The-Irish-dominate-Medal-of-Honor-recipients-95099859.html
I don’t really see what bearing any of this has on anything, except you claim we don’t support the Constitution (which I’m not sure what your source on that is) so I figured I would research the other things.
The first letter stated what a immigrant must have on him, well, that doesn’t seem a problem; where is it that you go to pick that up? Do you know how many Canadiens are working in the US without a residency or work permit? (try South Beach, Miami – barteneders, waitresses) Why aren’t we securing our NORTHERN border? Why? Those Canadiens are just like good ole ‘mericans white Anglo Saxon Protestants, well except for some of those Froggy Cannuks and some Eskimos. The whole thing is RACIST those are Mesicans and Hispanics coming inot Arizona – which of course has always been a Spanish area eulturally and Ethnictally – even Arizona’s indians (are they going to be asked to prove legallity?) are as ethnically hispanics as are Mexico, Guatemala, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia”s indians. Shouldn’t there be more hispanics in Arizona (the name is Spanish for Arid Zone, by the way)
I hate it when organizations I belong to show the most UNAMERICAN attitudes on Racism and Culture! What’s it say on the Statue of Liberty (it is not “Close the doors after my granpa gets in”) What do these people think when Lincoln Republicans wrote, “Any PERSON under the juristiction of the laws of the US has equal protection under the law” I am Hispanic (Guatemalan), fought in VN, Have great-grandfather that fought with the Ohio Militia in the US Civil War. My Mother-in-law lives in Phoenix, when in Phoenix I will speak Spanish at all times, and when an officer asks for my papers, I will tell him that I am a born US Citizen and that the burden of proof, according to US law, is on him. If he detains me, it will be a false arrest. None of us have to show ID to prove our citizenship, it is our RIGHT.
Cliff- It already has to be a legal stop by virtue of the way the law was written, in other words, there must me an underlying reason for the police to pull you over. Ergo, if you got pulled over for speeding you intend to tell the police officer than you are an American and he needs to prove otherwise? He will tell you that you were speeding, and a pre-prequisite for driving is having a license.
Also, whatever is engraved on the statue of liberty is not legally binding.
I just don’t understand how it is unamerican to require the rule of law to exist. I don’t want to be argumentative, I just honestly don’t get how the logic on this runs. I’m going to Belize on my honeymoon, if I break the law in Belize I would expect them to want to know who I am.
This is a circular insolvable problem. For illegals in this country we could set up a series of prequisites and required maximum times for completion thereof. How to enforce? We can’t even keep up with out parole programs.
Illegals will keep coming. A former Arizona Governor said it best. “Show me a 50 foot wall and I’ll show you a 50 foot ladder.”
How do we secure the border(s)? We can’t.
Are we comfortable with the tenet that our ancestors established themselves here awhile ago and we will share our country with only a limited number of newcomers? Is this ethical?
The only solution is to invest in Mexico so that the Mexican standard of living is similar to that of the USA. With similar living standards the incentive to immigrate to the USA would be low. If we quit spending $80-$100 billion/year we would have the funds to achieve that goal.
As usual, Chris Matthews, is a liberal, progressive bonehead.
Must respond to two 7/29 contributors to the Az law flap. Joseph just maybe the law is not aabout pure hatred and racism, but
some citizens being trampled on along the southern border when it is the govt’s job to protect them…not sue them for trying to
do what the govt is adamantly refusing to do. Ever see the trashed desert near Tucson? And John McCue…I well remember the
Europe of the thirties, early in my 81 year span. No, the TeaBaggers do NOT remind me of conquest mad despots, but more of
the guys at Bunker Hill or Valley Forge. willing to risk all for freedom and liberty. And PLEASE, don not try to flatter us, the
American Legion out of one side of you mouth while out of the other cearly imply that we support an “unconstitutional” activity.
Far from it: we are pledged to preserve, support and protect it from ALL enemies…both internal and external. We may tend to
sound somewhat like Jeffersonian Democrats, but no apologies. We have great reference for the founding fathers. And PLEASE
drop the stupid MOH holders crap. They were ALL plain old loyal Americans who answered the call. As to the AZ immigration law
flap…why is it racist, unfair or unconstitutional to want ALL potential future citizens to play by the same set of rules, whether from
Europe, Asia or Africa OR Latin America? Yes, we are a nation of immigrants and it is our strength. All of my great grandparents
were..LEGAL ones. Guys, gotta start being honest with yourselves.
I don’t care what the Federal or any state immigration policy is. The Constitution says:
The POWERS NOT DELEGATED TO THE UNITED STATES BY THE CONSTITUTION, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people (emphasis mine), in the 10th amendment, so if the powers ARE delegated to the U.S. by the same, they are RESERVED EXCLUSIVELY to the former, i.e. the Federal government. And what do we read in the Article 1, section 8:The Congress shall have Power..To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, in other words, to determine who qualifies as a naturalized citizen and who does not. The states can only make laws more LIBERAL than that but not tougher or narrowly drawn, such as the Fascist Arizona immigration policy.
It is VERY typical for the conservatives and republicans to use Constitution ONLY when it fits their agenda and ignore it when it does not. Besides, like Pat Boyd above, they have nothing for their argument short off name-calling. Very mature, Pat.
I am a recently naturalized citizen and unless you are one you know NOTHING of the state of immigration or right of immigrants in this country. Any unconstitutional abridgment of immigrant rights is not any different than Hitler’s policy against the Jews, plain and simple, and anyone who supports this Arizona fascist law would have no doubt support Hitler’s agenda, as well. And no wonder, Hitler was, after all, a conservative himself.
Finally, the Arizona law damages EVERYONE’S rights, citizen, naturalized and illegal alike. When was the last time you saw any of the illegal immigrants wearing a tag ” I am an illegal resident. You should ID me?” Never, of course, so the ONLY way to make sure you catch the illegals is to id EVERYONE. This, along with the Big Brother National ID bs, is blatantly against the Constitution, the right to be free from unreasonable searches, per the Fourth Amendment. So you cons who support the fascists Arizona law, are all simply Un-American. Why don’t you do us all a favor and just admit it, like your buddy Bill “I don’t care about the U.S. Constitution” O’Reilly already did.
And just so you know: I am neither Republican nor Democrat. I am a Libertarian, which you, my friends, are not.
The framers of the Constitution intended for the states to assist in the enforcement of ALL Federal Laws so that the Federal government would not have to retain officers in all jurisdictionsw of the nation to do that very thing. That was one of the arguments in favor of adopting the Constitution in the first place. Read The Federalist papers! They were written by men who helped write the Constitution. Secondly, if your first act upon entering this country is to violate its law, how do you justify claiming any rights under its laws? Thirdly, One of the primary if not the primary duty of the Federal government was to be the protection of each and every state from foreign invasion.
There is a difference between immigrants and illegal aliens. Why should we legalize 10m Plus lawbreakers when there are millions
of highly skilled people trying to come in legally. Why do these low skill Mexicans get a leg up on the people we need.
On the premption issue why do the local cops try to catch federally regulated kidnappers? Why are there local drug laws.
How are self declared cities declared safe for illegals. What would happen if local authorities decided not to do anything about
everything that federal law covers.
Work permits. We are probably the only country not serious about them. I know the Canadians are serious about them. If you need
to do a job up there, if you did not get a work permit before went all you can do is supervise. If you touch a tool you are in trouble.
I know they check the workplace. I know people who have had trouble over that.
Our government won’t enforce the immigration law. The reason is the President is afraid he will loose all those votes.
If legal Mexican – Americans are scared of being arrested when they get pulled over for speeding for not showing proof of being here legally, than they should be arrested for not showing a drivers license. I am in law enforcement and I am too busy with other emergencies to just look at Hispanic people, and single them out as being illegal aliens. Color makes no difference to me, and terrorists don’t care what color you are either! Our boarders must be secured or we will all pay! What do we need? Another 9-11? And by the way my son is half Mexican and he too feels the same way! Lets make a law that says all people, 18 and older must have photo ID on them or readily accessible. Problem solved! ALSO…. No Amnesty! My grandparents came to this great country through the front door, became citizens, and learned to speak English. What about all those people that are trying to become citizens the right way? Why should they get sent to the back of the line?
This whole argument is based on stupidity and mis-information. Please pardon my nasty tone long enough to let me explain. First, I believe in honesty and fair treatment. The only way for most Mexicans to come here is illegally. The wait for most Mexicans who have someone to sponsor them is over 20 years. But they can come and work immediately if they choose to come illegally. Because we needed the workers in the past, we quit enforcing the laws on immigration and allowed illegal immigration to skyrocket. Raids on factories were cut to about 10% of what they were before. In one recent case a factory was illegally telling workers where they could buy illegal documents in order to work. The factory was raided and the illegal workers were arrested but nothing was done to the people who were illegally hiring. Anyone who thinks the government is trying to do anything to stop illegal immigration is totally fooled.
The reason for the foolery.
Anti-immigration people want something done and are a political force. Business owners want the cheap hardworking employees. If a politician tries to do something effective he will either anger anti-immigration proponents or business owners. If he talks mean and does nothig then everyone will support him and he gets reelected. Lots of talk and no action gets a politician reelected and fools the public.
As an American I believe in ideals of honesty and fairness. To totally blame this situation on “illegals” who are actually playing by our rules is not fair. Our rules are, “You can come and work as long as it is illegally.” “We do not provide a viable legal alternative to come here and work for most people.” We have taken advantage of and used these people and now we need to arrive at a situation that is fair to both sides. Blaming and punishing them for playing by our rules is not honest nor fair.
More about the foolery. About one half of the people here illegally came in legally and overstayed. A perfect border protection would have only stopped about half of the illegals. But now we want to build a perfect fence AND PROVIDE MORE OPPORTUNITIES TO ENTER ILLEGALLY AND OVERSTAY by issuing more temporary visas. You can fool most of the people most of the time.
Now there is talk of making lifetime criminals out of little babies. They are born here and grow up here with no hope of being legal or normal. How can any decent human do that to a baby? It is so easy to sluff it off and blame the parents but we are the ones denying a chance for a life in the country where the child is born.
I just don’t see how that is even remotely true or accurate.
First, we have a legal immigration system. The reason the numbers are so low is because we are being inundated with line jumpers who have no intention of following the rules that are set up.
Two, what is the theory behind being a country of laws if we are going to simply disavow them. Since everyone seems to be citing this as a problem with those coming from Mexico, why is Mexico’s legal system with regard to immigration “fair” and our so injust?
Three, border protection is only part of the issue. Employer sanctions is clearly the way that this needs to happen.
Four, is there not something to be said for protection the rights of Americans over others. At a time when employment is over 10%, where is the understanding that jobs being occupied by those illegally present could be secured by those legally here?
Five, the argument about “babies” isn’t accurate either. It is saying that children born here will not automatically be US citizens. That doesn’t make them illegal, it just means they are not citizens by virtue of birthplace. Frankly I am not certain I could support that anyway, but let’s be honest about what it is and what it is not.
Let me ask this. What rights does a state have to protect the integrity of its own sovereignty? Under your scheme, I fail to see any action that could be taken. If for instance 3 million Americans just up and moved to Belize and elected their own folks, thus taking over the country in a non-violent, democratic manner, I assume you would support it whole hog? If not, please explain to me why not.
I would like to respond to the comment by Richard Smoot, that what ‘we need are highly skilled immigrants in this country, instead of the low-skill Mexicans’: I worked in an international company for many years; I employed quite a few ‘high-skilled’ workers from the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden. They, definitely, took jobs that Americans could have had. But more importantly, these people worked enough years to get their U.S. social security, then went back to their own countries and spent our revenue over there instead of in the U.S. Hardly a benefit for us. On the other hand, working for another company in California for many years, I employed many ‘low-skill’ immigrants (legal); these low-skill immigrants did, indeed, compete with the number of low-skill citizens (an ever-growing number as America is suffering under such low educational standards that our general population seems to becoming more ignorant by the year) However, I found one defining factor that seemed to be pretty generally prevalent – one very important to an employer – and that was that the Mexican immigrants were extremely appreciative of a job, any job, and took their job very seriously. There reputation for being ‘harder workers’ was well earned. Illegal immigration is definitely a problem, yes, but when there is so much commotion and, seemingly inordinate, attention DIRECTED TO an issue, it always makes me wonder, ‘what are we trying to draw attention AWAY from?’ For instance, when the ‘desirable’, highly educated, white collar bankers, wall street investors, etc.’, have just soaked us all for somewhere in the neighborhood of $139 TRILLION dollars, and still counting, with, again, seemingly little accountability or prosecution, I have to wonder who is benefiting from all this deflection? Regarding the cost to the American public, the issue of immigration pales next to the cost of these white collar criminals. I don’t think we have our priorities straight. When something begins to happen, seriously, on the flagrant, conscienceless, abject PLUNDER of our country, I’ll begin to take this illegal immigration issue more seriously.
While I can appreciate the sentiment, what crime did these white collar folks commit that they aren’t being punished for?
And again, wouldn’t it be Congresses responsibility to handle this? Assuming you are referring to the basic injustice and not specific illegal acts, in a Representative Democracy the legislators should be held responsible for this.
this is all crazy!!!!
Wait a second…there’s plenty to be furious about just in topics that actually fit the Legion’s purview: veterans’ health, benefits, burial fiascoes, PTSD and TBI, Military Sexual Trauma, the list goes on and on, and THIS is what makes my e-mail inbox?
It’s ideological garbage like this that keeps me and other post-9/11 soldiers out of this organization and looking for help elsewhere.
Get a grip and stay in your lane.
MOTHAX, I really appreciate your facts, insight and non-argumative response to such ignorant posters here, especially, Jack Berryhill and his gross distortions of US law and the INS Immigration procedures. He and others make many false statements that thankfully you have addressed with the facts and not the BS that spews forth from obviously uneducated mouths that have to claim others are Racists to deflect for their lack of true facts, especially in Federal Law. I’m a retired US Army Platoon Sergeant and it’s amazing how little Americans know about any of our countries history. How many of the above posters spouting false and mis-information have ever read the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Federalist Papers or even the Civil Rights Act of 1965? It’s quite obvious in their distorted logic used in purporting how well they know the Constituation by quoting it out of context to what fits their own agendas. One only embarrasses him or herself by their poor knowledge of US Law and the fact that illegals are breaking the law in their entry and taking a job an unemployed US citizen or legal resident is entitled too.
What about the American families that need the jobs to eat too? It angers me when I have fellow Americans that prefer to help lawbreakers over their own citizens in living the American dream. While millions of your fellow unemployed Americans suffer losing their family house; divorce, job loss stress and lots more, you have the nerve to complain about the rights of illegals here in the USA. Patriots you all are not! I joined the all- volunteer Army in 1975 to serve my country. You folks and your ilk only serve to help foreigners break US Law while your country’s people are ridiculed and branded as racists for no other reason than asking the Federal do it’s job under US immigration law and enforce the law.
Reasonably, should an individual be given a reward (US Citizenship) for breaking the law? I say a resounding, NO. Common sense tells us that when we reward bad behavior, we will have more of the same. If these individuals can choose which laws they choose to obey or disobey the law now, how could we expect them to obey it in the future if they were given citizenship?
Berryhill’s own words above, “This whole argument is based on stupidity and mis-information”. So, Berryhill who is the one basing his entire argument on stupidity and mis-information tonight??????
Apparently. most illegal immigrants and protester do not know they are of mixed ancestry. The general population of Mexico is of Indian and European (Spanish) ancestry. If they would searched in detail, they might be suprised in what they find.
Mexicans thinking that they are in their homeland are proving their IGNORANCE. I’d like to see anyone in this country go back to the homeland of their ancestors and it is their homeland.
Laws are in place to protect the masses. If these “Illegals” can get amnesty, then all the petty theives in our jails should get the same priviledge. Many petty theives did not break a FEDERAL LAW.
Immigrants are ALWAYS WELCOMED, but only if they migrate here LEGALLY!!!
Thank you Goodawg, a voice of reason in this sea of garbage. My parents were immigrants, they were treated like criminals coming here, strip searched, de-loused, checked for diseases. Excusing someone for breaking the law simply because it takes too long to comply with it is inane. I’m told they do it to better their families lot in life, so if I rob a bank to emulate them, that is, improve my families financial position, then that’s alright, really ignorant reasoning. And yes you can stop the crossing of a 2000 mile border simply and cheaply. We are a sovereign nation,we have that right, I’m a Nam guy, we probably still have plenty of Claymores lying around. Lets put up signs, in a multitude of languages so as to not miss anyone (no pun intended) AND THEN, mine the first 100 yards. Simple, no high tech, no thousands of National Guard, cross without permission, or at an unattended crossing place, you take your chances. It’s between you & providence. We have this problem because of our elected dolts, the Democrats want the votes, the Republicans want the cheap labor. So as another writer stated, we have more important things, lets mine OUR borders and move on to dumping these dolts in November. I’m an over 20 year, Legion member, this is a great organization, We love this country, We served this country, the Legion & I. Do not denigrate a great organization simply because you disagree with a position. Obama is our president, yes I personally would have preferred anyone else, even Hillary but he was elected, so I will respect his position and office though I vehemently disagree with everything he does.
Once a Marine always a Marine. The Commander in Chief has been elected. Twice in my life (with the second time being August 3, 2010) I have taken an oath. The first one was this “I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.”
This “…impermissibly burden federal resources and redirect federal agencies away from the priorities they have established.” from the judge, doesn’t she mean that “We (the federal government administration) don’t want to.”? Since the feds seem unwilling to enforce immigration laws on the books, isn’t it possible for a person or state to sue the feds and get a court order to make the feds enforce the laws? I know this has happened at the local government level.
Of course, one congressman recently claimed that the federal government can pretty much do anything it wants until the federal courts, rules that the government can’t do a specific thing. So, according to this congressman, the federal government can become facist until the federal courts rule that it can’t. And with the schedule of the jurists and motions for continuances and other delays to maneuver, it could take months, years, for court rulings, while damage is being done.
Ay carumba!