Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Perdition

Arizona Governor signs Immigration Bill

272 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

AROCES

Obama™ has spoken.... for the Federal government™

He may as well of said "screw State rights - the Federal Government™ knows best for Everybody".

-the guy is a complete fraud.

By the CNN Wire Staff

April 23, 2010 1:54 p.m. EDT

http://www.cnn.com/2...dex.html?hpt=T1

Washington (CNN) -- President Obama on Friday criticized a controversial new immigration bill in Arizona, calling it "misguided."

"Our failure to act responsible at the federal level will only open the door to irresponsibility by others. That includes, for example, the recent efforts in Arizona, which threaten to undermine basic notions of fairness that we cherish as

Americans, as well as the trust between police and their communities that is so crucial to keeping us safe," the president said at a naturalization ceremony for 24 members of the military.

"In fact, I've instructed members of my administration to closely monitor the situation and examine the civil rights and other implications of this legislation. But if we continue to fail to act at the federal level, we will continue to see misguided efforts opening up around the country."

Obama added, "As a nation, as a people, we can choose a different future, a future that keeps faith with our history, with our heritage, and with the hope that America has always inspired in the hearts of people all over the world."

**********

Good point here.

That is really a mind frame of someone who is a socialist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Startraveler

Good point here.

That is really a mind frame of someone who is a socialist.

Are you joking? It should be well known that immigration policy falls under the purview of the federal government (the Constitution specifically gives the federal government the authority "To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization").

Nishimura Ekiu v. United States

It is an accepted maxim of international law that every sovereign nation has the power, as inherent in sovereignty and essential to self-preservation, to forbid the entrance of foreigners within its dominions or to admit them only in such cases and upon such conditions as it may see fit to prescribe.
In the United States, this power is vested in the national government, to which the Constitution has committed the entire control of international relations, in peace as well as in war.
It belongs to the political department of the government, and may be exercised either through treaties made by the President and Senate or through statutes enacted by Congress, upon whom the Constitution has conferred power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, including the entrance of ships, the importation of goods, and the bringing of persons into the ports of the United States; to establish a uniform rule of naturalization; to declare war, and to provide and maintain armies and navies, and to make all laws which may be necessary and proper for carrying into effect these powers and all other powers vested by the Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

Fong Yue Ting v. United States

The right to exclude or to expel aliens, or any class of aliens, absolutely or upon certain conditions, in war or in peace, is an inherent and inalienable right of every sovereign nation.

In the United States, the power to exclude or to expel aliens is vested in the political departments of the National Government, and is to be regulated by treaty or by act of Congress, and to be executed by the executive authority according to the regulations so established, except so far as the Judicial Department is authorized by treaty or by statute, or is required by the Constitution, to intervene.

The power of Congress to expel, like the power to exclude, aliens, or any specified class of aliens, from the country, may be exercised entirely through executive officers; or Congress may call in the aid of the Judiciary to ascertain any contested facts on which an alien's right to remain in the country has been made by Congress to depend.

Congress has the right to provide a system of registration and identification of any class of aliens within the country, and to take all proper means to carry out that system.

Or if you want to keep it as pithy as possible:

Truax v. Raich

The authority to control immigration -- to admit or exclude aliens -- is vested solely in the Federal Government.

When Obama says we have to act on a federal level, he's expressing a sentiment that everyone (except you, apparently) already knows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES

Are you joking? It should be well known that immigration policy falls under the purview of the federal government (the Constitution specifically gives the federal government the authority "To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization").

Nishimura Ekiu v. United States

It is an accepted maxim of international law that every sovereign nation has the power, as inherent in sovereignty and essential to self-preservation, to forbid the entrance of foreigners within its dominions or to admit them only in such cases and upon such conditions as it may see fit to prescribe.
In the United States, this power is vested in the national government, to which the Constitution has committed the entire control of international relations, in peace as well as in war.
It belongs to the political department of the government, and may be exercised either through treaties made by the President and Senate or through statutes enacted by Congress, upon whom the Constitution has conferred power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, including the entrance of ships, the importation of goods, and the bringing of persons into the ports of the United States; to establish a uniform rule of naturalization; to declare war, and to provide and maintain armies and navies, and to make all laws which may be necessary and proper for carrying into effect these powers and all other powers vested by the Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

Fong Yue Ting v. United States

The right to exclude or to expel aliens, or any class of aliens, absolutely or upon certain conditions, in war or in peace, is an inherent and inalienable right of every sovereign nation.

In the United States, the power to exclude or to expel aliens is vested in the political departments of the National Government, and is to be regulated by treaty or by act of Congress, and to be executed by the executive authority according to the regulations so established, except so far as the Judicial Department is authorized by treaty or by statute, or is required by the Constitution, to intervene.

The power of Congress to expel, like the power to exclude, aliens, or any specified class of aliens, from the country, may be exercised entirely through executive officers; or Congress may call in the aid of the Judiciary to ascertain any contested facts on which an alien's right to remain in the country has been made by Congress to depend.

Congress has the right to provide a system of registration and identification of any class of aliens within the country, and to take all proper means to carry out that system.

Or if you want to keep it as pithy as possible:

Truax v. Raich

The authority to control immigration -- to admit or exclude aliens -- is vested solely in the Federal Government.

When Obama says we have to act on a federal level, he's expressing a sentiment that everyone (except you, apparently) already knows.

Federal government has failed miserably with the immigration issue, now a State wants to solve the problem they got because of the Federal government failure.

Now you want to continue listening to them? :blink:

Edited by AROCES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astute One

Are you joking? It should be well known that immigration policy falls under the purview of the federal government (the Constitution specifically gives the federal government the authority "To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization").

Where does it say immigration policy is exclusive to the Federal Government. IT DOES NOT!!!!

It was left out so that when the Federal Government derilicts it's constitutional duty, the STATE government can TAKE CARE OF BUSINESS to protect the welfare of its citizens.

Go travel some stars because your comments are WAY OUT IN SPACE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Startraveler

Where does it say immigration policy is exclusive to the Federal Government. IT DOES NOT!!!!

Did you miss the body of case law determining exactly that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astute One

Did you miss the body of case law determining exactly that?

I must have missed that part. Show me!

If this was true, Eric Holder would be all over it and stating so. He's NOT!

"Arizona's new law is, "I fear, subject to potential abuse," Holder told a news conference."

And AREN'T ALL LAWS SUBJECT TO POTENTIAL ABUSE?

So, this law is not different than others.

Edit to remove remark

Edited by Fluffybunny
Stop with the personal jabs at other members

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the1truebat

I love this tactic of enforcement, way to go AZ. Why is this even an issue? Why are so many people jumping up and saying, "Oh, those poor illegals.", If they want the rights of a citizen then go home. If they want the rights of a U.S. citizen, then do it legal. I get tired of people defending these criminals. If our federal government wants to open a pathway to citizenship, I have no problem with that, just as long it heads south to the Mexican border.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Poopie

I must have missed that part. Show me!

If this was true, Eric Holder would be all over it and stating so. He's NOT!

"Arizona's new law is, "I fear, subject to potential abuse," Holder told a news conference."

And AREN'T ALL LAWS SUBJECT TO POTENTIAL ABUSE?

So, this law is not different than others.

Any law which infringes upon the bill of rights is unconstitutional.

I dislike illegals as much as any hard working american being sucked dry... I can't stand the drain on society, but there are right ways to do things... This is wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
J.B.

I love this tactic of enforcement, way to go AZ. Why is this even an issue? Why are so many people jumping up and saying, "Oh, those poor illegals.", If they want the rights of a citizen then go home. If they want the rights of a U.S. citizen, then do it legal. I get tired of people defending these criminals. If our federal government wants to open a pathway to citizenship, I have no problem with that, just as long it heads south to the Mexican border.

Problem isn't the illegals, this time. They're b****ing because legal U.S. citizens think they're going to get mass racial profiling and detainment of people who do belong here. Will it be abused? Most definitely. Is it written specifically for abuse? No. Should it be tightened up so that there's less loopholes? Probably. Will it be done? Only if the citizens of AZ themselves up and vote to. The AZ government isn't stupid enough to overlook a mass vote in favor of reforming this bill. They'd be run out of office and their state would be boycotted for a long time if they did.

If the law becomes a serious problem, then yeah, work to reform it. Let's not judge before the first month on this, please? Not everyone's the racist hick the PC crowd calls all their enemies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the1truebat

Problem isn't the illegals, this time. They're b****ing because legal U.S. citizens think they're going to get mass racial profiling and detainment of people who do belong here. Will it be abused? Most definitely. Is it written specifically for abuse? No. Should it be tightened up so that there's less loopholes? Probably. Will it be done? Only if the citizens of AZ themselves up and vote to. The AZ government isn't stupid enough to overlook a mass vote in favor of reforming this bill. They'd be run out of office and their state would be boycotted for a long time if they did.

If the law becomes a serious problem, then yeah, work to reform it. Let's not judge before the first month on this, please? Not everyone's the racist hick the PC crowd calls all their enemies.

Did you just call me a racist hick? Or did I misread that last part of your post?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
J.B.

Did you just call me a racist hick? Or did I misread that last part of your post?

You misread. The reason there's an issue is because of legal immigrants/natural born Americans fearing they're going to get thrown in jail by racist hick cops who abuse a law that could probably be written much better in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the1truebat

You misread. The reason there's an issue is because of legal immigrants/natural born Americans fearing they're going to get thrown in jail by racist hick cops who abuse a law that could probably be written much better in the first place.

Right, I gotcha, sorry for the confusion. I think you're right though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astute One

Any law which infringes upon the bill of rights is unconstitutional.

I dislike illegals as much as any hard working american being sucked dry... I can't stand the drain on society, but there are right ways to do things... This is wrong.

why is that?

why is it ok to break the law?

if it is Ok to break this law, then why not just break another and another.

this sets a precedence for breaking the law.

Edited by Astute One

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
J.B.

Right, I gotcha, sorry for the confusion. I think you're right though.

And what I was saying earlier, was that not everybody who disagrees with the peace crowd is a racist hick, so let's watch and wait, see how this bill works out. It's better to test it for say. . . a month, maybe three, get a feel for how it works, then plug up whatever holes need plugging up. If you say every ****ing law needs to be spelled out, you're treating everyone like morons. Let's see how Arizona plays this. If it's bad, we work on fixing the bad, and heck, maybe other states can even learn a lesson on fixing their own issues with this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ninjadude

Arizona will be feeling the economic pinch shortly. Tourism in AZ is about 10Billion a year. 30% of that comes from Mexico. 30% comes from California. Both places are telling their citizens not to do any business with AZ. Arizona shot itself in the foot. It will become a ghost state populated by white racists, KKK and other birther fanatics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wickian

Arizona will be feeling the economic pinch shortly. Tourism in AZ is about 10Billion a year. 30% of that comes from Mexico. 30% comes from California. Both places are telling their citizens not to do any business with AZ. Arizona shot itself in the foot. It will become a ghost state populated by white racists, KKK and other birther fanatics.

Only those who both disagree with the law and are against it enough to not take their vacation will avoid vacationing there. From what I've seen and heard there are many more people who support the law then oppose it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Perdition

I must have missed that part. Show me!

If this was true, Eric Holder would be all over it and stating so. He's NOT!

"Arizona's new law is, "I fear, subject to potential abuse," Holder told a news conference."

And AREN'T ALL LAWS SUBJECT TO POTENTIAL ABUSE?

So, this law is not different than others.

Edit to remove remark

Did you even read the Supreme Court cases that Startraveler posted?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Perdition

I love this tactic of enforcement, way to go AZ. Why is this even an issue? Why are so many people jumping up and saying, "Oh, those poor illegals.", If they want the rights of a citizen then go home. If they want the rights of a U.S. citizen, then do it legal. I get tired of people defending these criminals. If our federal government wants to open a pathway to citizenship, I have no problem with that, just as long it heads south to the Mexican border.

No one ever said anything about feeling sorry for illegals. The issue is being unconstitutional via this passage:

A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, WITHOUT A WARRANT, MAY ARREST A PERSON

IF THE OFFICER HAS PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT THE PERSON HAS COMMITTED

ANY PUBLIC OFFENSE THAT MAKES THE PERSON REMOVABLE FROM THE UNITED STATES.

The potential of racial profiling, and the forcing of all citizens to carry government verified ID. It also takes the matter of immigration into the states hand when immigration is a federal jurisdiction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astute One

Arizona will be feeling the economic pinch shortly. Tourism in AZ is about 10Billion a year. 30% of that comes from Mexico. 30% comes from California. Both places are telling their citizens not to do any business with AZ. Arizona shot itself in the foot. It will become a ghost state populated by white racists, KKK and other birther fanatics.

Great. A land free of looney liberals and illegal immigrants. A dream come true.

But I hardly think that will be the case.

The economy may decline a little. The hospitals won't be as busy taking care of all the uninsured Mexicans.

There will be jobs available for those that want them.

It would be nice to see the sources of your $3.0 billion in tourism from Mexico. haha. Illegal immigrants don't count as tourists. They need a tourist visa to count as a tourist. More like CRIMINALS. So it is more realistic to say the state will lose some revenue that criminals bring to the state. Good. The state doesn't need to profit from crime. Arizona is not the CIA.

Think of the money that will be saved in the courts.

Think about how much more safe driving in the state will be.

This will get a bunch of dangerous mexican clunkers off the roads.

This will get mexicans off the roads that can't read the street signs.

This will get the mexicans off the roads that don't have auto insurance.

I wonder if there will be a hotline where I can turn some mexicans in to be deported.

I bet that number will be busy for awhile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astute One

Did you even read the Supreme Court cases that Startraveler posted?

Yes, I read them.

They all refer to Federal law. I didn't know the Arizona bill had anything to do with Federal Law. I thought it was a State law.

Just like John McCain said to Obama. IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE NEW AZ LAW, SEND 30,000 FEDERAL TROOPS TO THE BORDER AND ENFORCE FEDERAL LAW.

Otherwise, the new State law will take care of it for you.

This is going to get real interesting. I heard there are more states getting ready to impose the new state laws.

The raping a pillaging of our resources is being stopped, and it is about time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Perdition

Yes, I read them.

They all refer to Federal law. I didn't know the Arizona bill had anything to do with Federal Law. I thought it was a State law.

Just like John McCain said to Obama. IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE NEW AZ LAW, SEND 30,000 FEDERAL TROOPS TO THE BORDER AND ENFORCE FEDERAL LAW.

Otherwise, the new State law will take care of it for you.

This is going to get real interesting. I heard there are more states getting ready to impose the new state laws.

The raping a pillaging of our resources is being stopped, and it is about time.

States are forbidden to set any laws pertaining to immigration because it is federal jurisdiction.

Some people are just backwards and get p***ed off that the government is taking state matter into federal hands (health care) yet cant see the problem with states taking federal matter into states hands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astute One

States are forbidden to set any laws pertaining to immigration because it is federal jurisdiction.

Some people are just backwards and get p***ed off that the government is taking state matter into federal hands (health care) yet cant see the problem with states taking federal matter into states hands.

It is simple really. When everything the Fed touches turns to crap...example immigration, why would anyone of sound mind want more of the same crap. It wouldn't be a problem if their wasn't a big problem with accountability at the fed level.

The states are not forbidden from being responsible. States are not forbidden from protecting their people. States are not forbidden from addressing immigration. Most states would prefer to let the Fed handle it so they can use their taxpayer dollars on other stuff. It's too bad AZ must wait until August.

Edited by Astute One

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cerberusxp

Yes, I read them.

They all refer to Federal law. I didn't know the Arizona bill had anything to do with Federal Law. I thought it was a State law.

Just like John McCain said to Obama. IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE NEW AZ LAW, SEND 30,000 FEDERAL TROOPS TO THE BORDER AND ENFORCE FEDERAL LAW.

Otherwise, the new State law will take care of it for you.

This is going to get real interesting. I heard there are more states getting ready to impose the new state laws.

The raping a pillaging of our resources is being stopped, and it is about time.

It's a state law re-enforcing of Federal law that has been ignored. Look the safety of American citizens have been compromised. That is main reason for this bill way too many citizens are being MURDERED and KIDNAPPED by illegals. Like I said earlier I have a sister that moved to NE. out of fear for her and her husbands LIVES. They lived just out side of Deming N.M.. Lock the border down. It is one of the only things that the Federal Government actually is Charged with doing in the Constitution and they have failed at it. Hey all you lefty college students try this experiment.

Get together with a bunch of your friends and sneak into Canada and tell them you will do the jobs they don't want to do. When you are forcibly returned tell the media about your experience.

Edited by cerberusxp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cerberusxp

Any law which infringes upon the bill of rights is unconstitutional.

I dislike illegals as much as any hard working american being sucked dry... I can't stand the drain on society, but there are right ways to do things... This is wrong.

Are you saying you want to extend our Constitutional rights to illegal foreigners? Nowhere on the planet does another country extend their constitutional rights to illegal aliens. Try it! More than likely you will end up in prison for an extended stay in there country.

Some days I feel like I'm dealing with rocks.

Edited by cerberusxp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wickian

Yes, I read them.

They all refer to Federal law. I didn't know the Arizona bill had anything to do with Federal Law. I thought it was a State law.

Just like John McCain said to Obama. IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE NEW AZ LAW, SEND 30,000 FEDERAL TROOPS TO THE BORDER AND ENFORCE FEDERAL LAW.

Otherwise, the new State law will take care of it for you.

This is going to get real interesting. I heard there are more states getting ready to impose the new state laws.

The raping a pillaging of our resources is being stopped, and it is about time.

I read an article earlier claiming hundreds illegal immigrants are already leaving the state and heading to Utah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.