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.

 

President Obama Negates Federal Lawsuit Against Arizona

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 10:31 AM
link   
In his speech regarding immigration reform this morning, President Obama said that "states like Arizona have decided to take matters into their own hands because of the void created by a lack of immigration control. This is understandable".

By saying that this is understandable, he's just managed to negate the Federal Government claims that Arizona's new law is illegal.

He's also just announced that a blanket amnesty won't happen as it would encourage people to come to the US illegally and discourage legal immigration! Yay! Something sensible from Obama FINALLY.




posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 10:34 AM
link   
reply to post by babybunnies
 


I agree; after hearing, ad nauseum, for the past several years how gosh darn smart this man is, it is nice to see him say something that actually sounds smart.



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 10:38 AM
link   
Saying something is 'understandable' doesn't make it legal. If there's a case for the law being illegal under current federal statutes (and I'm not saying it is), then there's a case.



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 10:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


I didn't hear the speech.
Saying it's "reasonable' doesn't negate anything. Reasonable doesn't = legal.
I don't know that the suit is even about "immigration", it's would be more about keeping Federal authority and control, as enumerated by The Constitution.
I'm very skeptical, if Obama does do anything different , I'll be pleasantly surprised.



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
Saying something is 'understandable' doesn't make it legal. If there's a case for the law being illegal under current federal statutes (and I'm not saying it is), then there's a case.


Given the Arizona law virtually mirrors federal law, it is hard to imagine how the federal government could build a case against Arizona, and even attempting to do so seems to be a remarkable waste of tax dollars. If the federal government wants this to go away, then it would behoove them to do the job they have been tasked with, rather than avoid that job and waste tax dollars suing a state for doing the job they refuse to do.



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by babybunnies
He's also just announced that a blanket amnesty won't happen as it would encourage people to come to the US illegally and discourage legal immigration! Yay! Something sensible from Obama FINALLY.


Sorry, I don't buy it. He lied repeatedly about aspects of the health care bill, signed it into law and we find out afterwards about the lies. He'll do the same thing with his "reform bill" and it will be outright amnesty. *I wager 1000 ATS points.*



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 10:45 AM
link   
It is political posturing at this time, that is all. He is trying to make the Republicans look bad, by stating that it needs to be a joint effort. To state it is a moral immperative to solve this problem is a load. You see this is just to gather votes for the democrats in the upcoming election and maintain a majority.



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 10:47 AM
link   
I agree. Saying it's understandable really implies nothing as to how the rest of his thoughts and reasoning might go from there....

This is understandable and we will be taking steps to make this a non-issue for them.

This is understandable but we'll allow the courts to prove or disprove it.

This is understandable but we're still not going to tolerate it.



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


The issue would be who's authority is valid to enforce Federal responsibilities, not how well the Federal government is doing it. It's a questionable legal claim
to say that the Feds are not doing their job so the States can, they have no Constitutional authority to do so. It's specifically stated in the US Constitution that it's a Federal job, and Federal law supersedes State law.
That would be the only legal issue.



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 10:56 AM
link   
Where's the link? Sounds like there was more to his statement that perhaps was left out? Like... "states like Arizona have decided to take matters into their own hands because of the void created by a lack of immigration control. This is understandable. But it's still illegal and unconstitutional."


Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
Saying something is 'understandable' doesn't make it legal.


I agree. It's understandable that the woman who was raped by a Asian man hates all Asian men, but it doesn't make it right.

[edit on 7/1/2010 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 11:07 AM
link   
reply to post by OldDragger
 


The 10th Amendment is pretty clear in its language:


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.


~10th Amendment~

There is nothing in the Constitution prohibiting the states from protecting their own borders. Further, there are several sections of Article II, being the Declaration of Rights in the Arizona constitution, that protect all people, including immigrants, from government abuses. I would say Arizona is constitutionally protected in this matter.



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 11:09 AM
link   
Well, we should all know by now that what he says and what he does are polar opposites.

I figure this is as good a place as any to share this bit of information I have. There are a few issues I have with the veracity of the information I'm getting, so take it with a grain of salt please. It's 4th hand info and involves a very eccentric individual I know.

I have an acquaintance whom is a very eccentric business owner. He is a borderline tin foil hat wearer. The past few years he's stockpiled and I mean stockpiled a warehouse full of ammo, generators, food, ect. He has a full blown panic room.

He has gone into overdrive the past week. Says he has it under good authority from a friend of his in AZ whom he claims is connected that TSIATHTF. This friend uprooted himself and his family and left AZ this week because he fears what is about to go down. From what I got out of the conversation there is going to be a strike against the cartels in AZ. At that point all the branches of gangs related to these cartels are going to go ape-****.

I've known this guy for a few years. I've never seen him in such panic as I have seen him the past 2 weeks. Take it for what it's worth. I don't intend for this to be fear mongering. Just please everyone remain vigilant.



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 11:09 AM
link   
Agreed, I'd want to see a link and read his speech. obama saying something that makes sence? Scary. And I don't trust it.



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 




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.


Source



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 11:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


Arizona is not determining how they come into the country in the first place, they are dealing with those who are now here illegally. In doing so they are protecting the sovereignty and economic viability of their own state.



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 11:52 AM
link   
Wow.

Someone on ATS made a thread congratulating a politician for saying something?

This place really is hopeless.



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Arizona is not determining how they come into the country in the first place, they are dealing with those who are now here illegally.


That sounds like "regulating immigration" to me. That's Congress' job. I agree that enforcement of that law is NOT being handled as it should be by the feds, but that doesn't mean that states can start doing the fed's job.

This is off topic, anyway. There are many threads that argue the AZ law.



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by babybunnies
 


I'll believe it when I see it.

Obama says what ever is politically expedient.

The lawsuits will continue and no help from the feds on the border will be forthcoming.



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


I hardly see how this is off topic, and beyond that, I began in this thread by simply agreeing that Obama made some smart remarks regarding the immigration issue. However, the states have certainly not been prohibited from handling the problem of immigration, certainly not by Constitution, and while I haven't read the particular case law you cited earlier, what you quoted did not in anyway negate a states right to mirror federal law regarding immigration.



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 12:07 PM
link   
If saying it is "understandable" doesn't negate the Federal case, it certainly puts the idea that the Federal Government thinks Arizona acted illegally into question.

I tend to agree, that even though Obama SAID that there will be no blanket amnesty, and it SEEMS that he made sense, let's wait until the final wording on the bill.

My money is on them trying to pass this bill as soon as possible, failing miserably, and Obama making it an executive order including amnesty.

There was no link as this was from a live speech.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join