DHS strips Arizona sheriff of authority to patrol for illegal immigrants

This goes both ways.
I for one am against Illegal immigrants working, and it even happens up here in Canada, ask the farmers around here who some of their workers are.
But on the other hand, I am against solely stopping someone based on their looks, and making them prove they're American.

It's a tricky fine line

reply to post by Lemon.Fresh

Edit x2: If you do not like my proposal, why not tell me how you would fix the problem . .

Easy, get the employer, not the employee. E-Verify

Employers that use this system report that it is quite effective.



E Verify works. Employers need to use it. If every employer was required to use E Verify the problem of illegal workers would be greatly reduced.

If an employer uses it, they will have far less illegal workers working for them. I think that it should be required of all employers. It's not a constitutional issue because companies are not protected under the US constitution. Individuals are. The only individuals that are protected are legal US citizens. US citizens won't mind being checked With E Verify, because it won't bar them from employment. Only undocumented illegal workers would.

[edit on 10/8/2009 by whatukno]

This is one of the reasons I chose to live in Arizona, and it's why I can still safely walk my streets at night.

Apparently unhappy with how good we have it here in sunny AZ, dirtbags like our former (and much hated) governor are determined to make Arizona just as crappy to live in as California with all its illegal alien problems.

Time to leave the union, we can do better on our own.

reply to post by whatukno


Hmmm

Should we check illegal status manually or by electronic means.

It is the same damn thing.


They have to be checked.

reply to post by Muundoggie


LOL, great point.

about the time i think that all atser have their heads screwed on straight, a topic like this pops up, and we are back to fighting , and the big picture is lost

reply to post by Lemon.Fresh


What the hell man! I gave you the freaking website that employers can go to NOW and check each and every employee to see whether or not they are legal to work in the US.

Are you blatantly being argumentative? It's really not necessary, I showed you exactly what employers can do RIGHT NOW to combat this problem. It's the employers that are the problem.

The employers need to be held accountable for hiring illegal workers. If illegal workers are cut from access to work, the problem will dissolve.

You want to have police officers jack boot people up against walls, making them prove they are able to work in the US. When all that has to happen is employers have to do the dirty work. The police should just have to check employer records.

Employers are to be held accountable, if there were no jobs undocumented illegal immigrants could rely on doing. They wouldn't come here. Right now there are people in this country I guarantee that don't see those jobs as below them. The unemployment rate in this country is really nearing great depression levels. (don't let the media fool you, the numbers are much higher than they report)

There are people in this country that would do those jobs. They are Americans out of work because of the recession. E Verify works and would get those jobs to Americans.

[edit on 10/8/2009 by whatukno]

Caught Sheriff Joe on the tube last night on an interview about this.
He pretty much told the Fed's to F**k off.

He said he will increase what he is doing not decrease.



I do agree with you on the employers, but it needs to be hit from all sides.
He is catching lots of drug traffic people as well.

A few things...

First, this argument about "doing work no American wants to do" is a joke. There are lots of people who don't "want" to do their job...but they have to. Especially with the current economy, "need" overrides "want". These jobs are American resources. Allow the job to conform to the people if it needs to be filled...not farm it off to illegals with some sad excuse to keep the pay down.

Secondly, (as said multiple times here) profiling is legal and an accepted method of Police work. Sometimes it is sex, color, nationality, height, weight, etc...or combinations. It is a stupid argument to say you have to look at everyone when you know it is person fitting a given description.

Lastly, there is a simple solution to all this and all the arguing. Keep people out of this country that try to get here without legal permission.

Imagine what the country would be like today if the federal government would have invoked the second amendment on Wyatt Earp! I am all for the enforcement of the constitution and such, but the federal government has absolutely no power in this case I would say, and why does the federal government keep trying to powergrab? What is the freaking point!

Go Wyatt ... I mean Joe!

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
not sure where I stand on this

firstly how can you "patrol" for illegal immigrants?
someone explain this to me?

secondly, as an aside, since illegal immigrants don't pay income tax I guess they are model americans that every citizen can learn from

Patrolling for illegals should be done after arrest... many times they are easy to collar because they have nothing to lose. Many have no regard for following laws like Drinking in public, DUI, unlicensed driving, urinating in public, pandering.. being arrested to them means getting a hot shower, fed, and a bed to sleep on... and upon release, their clothes are returned to them dry cleaned.

They have no license to suspend, no money for fines, rarely a steady job to get fired from.. county time = vacation from the streets. On top of that its almost impossible to ID some of them, all their names are Jose Lopez with a birthday that usually starts on 1-1 of whatever year they think they were born. No address either. They are adept at gaming the system and often times laugh in the face of arresting officers who are powerless to do anything meaningful.

A pro-active unit dedicated to "saturation patrol" areas known to have high numbers of illegals, where officers focus on quality of life crimes, ie broken window theory stuff... Once processed into the county jail a routine immigration check of all suspects should be conducted, those lacking are turned over the border patrol.

Sounds easy, except routine immigration checks are rarely done if at all.. thanks to insane rules, and before you know it the illegal(s) are back on the block doing whatever they were doing before... well rested, showered, full of county food, and sporting clean county pressed duds.

Sadly, it usually takes a serious felony or three before the Feds take interest in someones immigration status.

BTW if you're interested in what an illegal alien is, google 'US code Title 8'

This is so funny.... This America and Canada was founded on illegal immigration. The Europeans came and destroyed the natural resources for thier own gain, stole land and basically slaughtered people. Now the mexicans are returning the favour. They come and use your resources, steal what they can and will at times kill people. I say go mexicans...what goes around comes around. People say it will be the children and grandchildren who will reap the rewards of thier founding fathers. You see it all over today. Caucasions are now the targets of random violence because back in the day it was thier grandfathers who would use random violence to keep the colors down. The many races are beginning to see that the white man is not as protected as they once were and are now acting out many years of repression and are striking back. You yourself may not have done anything to deserve this but it is you who will suffer for your grandfathers mistakes.

[edit on 8-10-2009 by kerazeesicko]

reply to post by kerazeesicko


I was on a jobsite with some illegal Mexicans one day, and we were stopped for a lunch break. I understood a fair amount of Spanish, but I was missing some inside joke, so I had to ask.

Several of the Mexicans were calling this one young guy a "Guatemalen"?! It was obviously an insult, and they were all having a good laugh, so I asked why it was so funny? They told me........

"Oh, we hate Guatemalans! They sneak across the border and steal our jobs! They are nothing but trash in Mexico!"

I was cracking up inside, and speechless on the outside, and my buddy slaps my back and says, "Well, there you have it, lets get back to work!"

I guess anybody "South" of you isn't worth much, so kudos to Canada!

reply to post by Phlegmi


Works for me. Here in Denver, we know what it's like when the police don't enforce the immigration laws - and the city government has forbidden them to do so since way back in the "Sanctuary City" Webb administration days. Now we have illegal aliens with the run of the town, gunning down police officers on and off duty, bothering law abiding citizens, their kids terrorizing neighborhoods vandalizing vehicles... God, I WISH we had Joe Arpaio up here enforcing the law.

[edit on 8-10-2009 by Murky]

Originally posted by verylowfrequency
reply to post by centurion1211

 

Sheriff Joe Arpaio belongs in an intensive management unit in a Federal Penitentiary for his crimes against humanity. I say lock the leftover fat stupid ugly NAZI Pig up and use him for medical research. I know when he dies we will all hear hallelujah vibrating in the wind and people will come from all over the world just to urinate on his grave.


[edit on 7-10-2009 by verylowfrequency]

I reckon he shouldn't expect a christmas card from you this year, then.

Really? Enforcing the law is now a "crime against humanity"?

I'm afraid you're gonna have to produce the UN resolution on THAT one.

Then produce the US statue making the UN resolution binding law here.

Since everyone just cant get along, I , say Sheriff Joe is now acting president of the US and everyone will be subject to his style of marshall law until we work this problem out COMPLETELY.

reply to post by kettlebellysmith


Oh Boy, another Constitutional scholar!

U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, clause 18

The Congress shall have Power - To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

The tenth amendment does not invalidate Article 1, Section 8, clause 18.

Look it up and really read it. There is a reason why we are United States. The tenth amendment protects States Rights, but it's not a license for extremists to escape the rule of law or just make up their own as they go along.

The Sheriff is overstepping his bounds, as they usually do. You are reading what you want to believe instead of what the amendment actually does. You can't "cherry pick" the Constitution, it's one full meaning not a bunch of little ones you can opt in or out of.

To do what he is doing without bias, he would have to stop everyone and demand proof of citizenship. That would be a violation of your Civil Rights. Ever hear the term "Illegal search and seizure".

Got you passport handy?
What if you just forgot your wallet?

You need a reason to detain a person in the U.S. and that reason can't be some redneck's opinion of what your ethnic origin is. If you are caught committing a crime, things change a bit. But if you are out for a Sunday drive and some cop pulls you over cause, "yeer tan's jest dark nuff", that's a violation of your Civil Rights.

Get over it. Breathe it in, and embrace it, that's freedom, not what you propose.

If you want to live in that kind of country move to China and see how far you can open your mouth before somebody shuts it for you.

Sheriff Joe for president.

Comments from Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia regarding a court case in which the Fed's demanded that local Arizona sheriffs enforce the Brady Bill.

On June 27th, 1997, the sheriffs won; in Printz v. U.S. (521 U.S. 898) the U.S. Supreme Court struck Brady down. Associate Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the ruling for the Court, in which he explained our system of government at length. The justly revered system of checks and balances is the key:

“. . . The great innovation of this design was that ‘our citizens would have two political capacities, one state and one federal, each protected from incursion by the other’” – “a legal system unprecedented in form and design, establishing two orders of government, each with its own direct relationship, its own privity, its own set of mutual rights and obligations to the people who sustain it and are governed by it.” (P. 920)

Scalia quotes President James Madison, “father” of the Constitution: “[T]he local or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the supremacy, no more subject, within their respective spheres, to the general authority than the general authority is subject to them, within its own sphere.” The Federalist, No. 39 at 245.

Again and again, Justice Scalia pounds the point home (page 921): “This separation of the two spheres is one of the Constitution’s structural protections of liberty: ‘Just as the separation and independence of the coordinate branches of the Federal Government serve to prevent the accumulation of excessive power in any one branch, a healthy balance of power between the States and the Federal Government will reduce the risk of tyranny and abuse from either front.’. . .” Gregory, 501 U.S. at 458.

He quotes President Madison again: “In the compound republic of America, the power surrendered by the people is first divided between two distinct governments, and then the portion allotted to each subdivided among distinct and separate departments. Hence a double security arises to the rights of the people. The different governments will control each other, at the same time that each will be controlled by itself.” (P. 922)

Source

The Federal government has NO business telling Sheriff Joe what he should do within his area of juridiction. They do not have the authority, unless the Fed is changing the Constitution again.

reply to post by whatukno


So it is okay for the employer to "profile" . . . but not the police?

That makes no sense

reply to post by Lemon.Fresh


It's not profiling if you are doing it to every single person. The police don't have the manpower to check every single person, but individual employers do. When a person is hired (no matter for what job or position) they are checked through E Verify. If they are legally allowed to work in the US they get a job, if they aren't, then they don't get a job.

The police then can go to employers and check records and see if any of the employees are undocumented. If they are, fine the employer.