It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Arizona Immigration Bill is Unconstitutional

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by itsawild1
 


The rights of CITIZENSHIP as opposed to the rights of ILLEGAL immigrants? The selective enforcement of laws is a major problem. By just being here without going through the proper channels makes the opponents of this bill look foolish. I am sick of all the whining by illegals who are breaking the law by their vary presence. What about the rights of legal immigrants? They have multiple hoops to jump through to get their citizenship. Or how about how would you feel about someone jumping ahead of you in line at the bank? Everyone forgets decorum.




posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 04:15 PM
link   
Article I section 10 of the US Constitution Limits on State Power:


No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility.

No state shall, without the consent of the Congress, lay any imposts or duties on imports or exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection laws: and the net produce of all duties and imposts, laid by any state on imports or exports, shall be for the use of the treasury of the United States; and all such laws shall be subject to the revision and control of the Congress.

No state shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any duty of tonnage, keep troops, or ships of war in time of peace, enter into any agreement or compact with another state, or with a foreign power, or engage in war, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay.


Please tell me where this bill is Unconstitutional. I mean seriously the Constitution is not that hard to understand. The section that would apply to this bill is quoted right above.

I don't see anything where it says states can't enforce federal law.



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Aggie Man
 


Oh, REALLY!

So, there are frelling procedures outlined in the legislation that states that un Constitutional techniques will be used.

OH WAIT!

There are PROCEDURES! Only lawful contact between the government or police and people will be allowed.

Lie and obfuscate, the standard of the day.

Please link to the bill and show me EXACTLY where it states anything un Constitutional!

I have not see ONE PERSON YET, paste any of the legislation.

Sounds like lies, obfuscations and propaganda to me.



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


I think many people forget that each individual Republic has its own Constitution modeled to the wishes of the citizens of each individual state.

But then again constitutions be the states or US Constitution now a day are just good as those manipulating the government deem them useful.



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by marg6043
 


Federal Law trumps state law. Doesn't matter what is in the AZ Constitution illegal immigration is in fact a federal offense. Just because the Fed government decides not to enforce the law doesn't make the law any less a law.

The US Constitution does give the government authority to protect us from invasion. Just because the state had to pass a law to give them powers to actually enforce what the fed should be doing doesn't make it a power play.

I can see why you might think this is a power play, but its something that needs to be done. Sure it might be politically convenient, but none the less it is a step that needs to be taken.



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 04:32 PM
link   
Here is what I think is going to happen and what the plan is.

They do need reform here, but they are going this route for this reason.

They know that people will say it is unconstitutional. So to fix this problem, I see the feds solution requiring EVERYONE to have a national ID card. Then it is not profiling and we will ALL have to have one.

I really think this is the doorway. Id bet dollars to nails on it.



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Light of Night
 


That is the problem I have when it comes with the motives behind the passing of this bill "right now", if this bill as taken by more states and passed by more states it would have become the biggest accomplishment toward immigration laws to favor for once the American citizens.

But with mid term elections around the corner I wonder if is nothing but more political game against the voters.

After all any bills passed by the federal government and the states have a horde of constitutional lawyers looking to see if it can be challenge by any courts.



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by marg6043

Sometimes I think people simply do not understand what the Constitution is!

There is a Constitution of the United States, which covers all the states and limits the powers they cannot exert (as quoted above)... then there are state constitutions that specify how that state is to be run. In bo0th cases, the Constitution is in writing, and interpretations based on hearsay are simply irrelevant. If someone wants to make a claim of unconstitutionality, they should at least mention (and preferably link to) the offending sections and the parts of the respective constitutions that make them unconstitutional.

Oh, and the entire bill, SB1070, is right here in .pdf form for anyone who wants to actually understand what they did. The amended sections of the Arizona State Code are in blue. All I really saw was:
  • It prevents any municipality in Arizona from refusing to enforce Federal immigration laws and specifies penalties.

  • It makes illegal entry into Arizona a State offense as well, specifying compliance with Federal Immigration law.

  • It protects officers enforcing immigration laws from civil rights lawsuits unless they act in 'bad faith'.

  • It establishes a 'Gang and Immigration Intelligence Team' and provides funding, some of which is through violations (i.e. fines from municipalities who refuse to enforce Federal Law or impoundment of vehicles used in human smuggling).

  • It makes it harder to prove entrapment by employers accused of hiring illegal aliens.

Now what in that is unconstitutional?

TheRedneck



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by endisnighe
 


It's not the wording, it's the lack thereof.

Riddle me this...What does an undocumented person look like?

How will the Arizona law enforcement go about identifying undocumented persons, without violating the 4th Amendment rights of US citizens?

I know, I know....you can just tell by looking at them



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by amatrine
 


And that is another conspiracy that I will not dismiss that easily, the national ID has been a thorn on the side of those pushing it by many individual states that will not comply with it.



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Light of Night
 


Pffft, does not REQUIRE the protection from invasion?

What the does this mean than?



We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.


or this?



Section 8. The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;


or this?



To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;


SO, what is your ANSWER TO THESE COMPONENTS?



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by amatrine
 


Funny that you mention that seeing how AZ passed a law stating that prohibits the Real ID act being implemented in their state.

Just putting that out there is all.



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 04:39 PM
link   
well it appears that public opinion
sways in favor of immigration law
by 11 percent AND a majority.
So those who oppose it are in the
minority. Fromm CNN news poll.

www.cnn.com



[edit on 24-4-2010 by boondock-saint]



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by endisnighe
 


I think you need to go back and re-read my post. Doesn't quite sound like you understood what I wrote.

I'm asking where does it say in the constitution that the States can't enforce federal law? The Constitution does not saying anything about it. The States can enforce federal law all day and night all year long.



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


That is because the constitution has become like a toilet paper good to wipe yourself with when needed and then when its not for you advantage you just flush the darn thing down the toilet.



Still I wish that a bill like the Arizona was taken by more states to show the Federal government how fed up America really is.



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Aggie Man
 


How many times do I have to say this.

They even stated it in the legislation.

Whenever the normal lawful interaction between government or the police and people, they have the right to ask for documentation.

Sorry, it is RIGHT there in the legislation!

Ever get pulled over for a traffic violation? Ever want something from the government? Ever go to a public hospital?

Sorry, I am not going to fall for the techniques to vilify Arizona for this.

Pfffft, continue on people. Continue to state something without providing any proof.


[edit on 4/24/2010 by endisnighe]



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint
well it appears that public opinion
sways in favor of immigration law
by 11 percent AND a majority.
So those who oppose it are in the
minority. Fromm CNN news poll.

www.cnn.com



[edit on 24-4-2010 by boondock-saint]


That's fine and dandy; however, it is still unconstitutional. With majority backing, there should be no problem amending the constitution to suit the demands of the majority, no?



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 04:42 PM
link   
There is NOTHING UNCONSTITUTIONAL or WRONG with this recently passed Bill. In fact it is VERY BENEFICIAL to ALL of those who are LEGAL, law-abiding citizens of who have put in the BLOOD, SWEAT, and TEARS to make America great.

I find it VERY STRANGE that most of the people making the "unconstitutional claims", never raised their voices in the past in support constitutional issues!! Where were they so many times in the past that they could have spoken up? CLEARLY to me, it seems that these individuals are making a big stink about this because they, OR someone they KNOW, may be of ILLEGAL status, in other words a CRIMINAL! I hope the next law is that anyone with knowledge of an illegal whom doesn't REPORT them, they too be punished by the law. Not reporting a CRIMINAL is just as BAD as being one of them

GOOD JOB ARIZONA, THIS IS A BIG WIN FOR THE HARD-WORKING, LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS OF THE STATE.



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by endisnighe
 


I'm not going to argue any further. The courts shall decide. Then we can pick this back up and discuss further.



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by boondock-saint
 


You know that when it comes to "public opinion" our government laugh at polls results, look what public opinion had done to us when it came to the bailouts and the HCR.

We the people do not count anymore.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join