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.

 

My Solution for Arizona- Ignore the Federal Court Ruling!

page: 3
10
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 06:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProjectJimmy
Your "win-win" has either the US constitution torn to shreds by ignoring the law. Article IV Section 2, the Supremacy Clause would be worthless. Or it ends up in a Civil War, which is the outcome you seem to want.

It's either the death of the rule of law, or the death of thousands of Americans. Are you out of your mind? Neither of those situations results in any form of "win."

what you seem to be omitting is the difference between
1860 and 2010.

In 1860, the majority of slaves were in the south
therefore the war lines were drawn along the Mason Dixon
line.

In 2010, ALL 50 states have illegal immigrants. Just where
do you think the war lines will be drawn there? At the
City Limit signs of Washington DC ????




posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 08:40 AM
link   
reply to post by abecedarian
 


Simply put the wording of the decision says that enforcing the listed subsections and sections would hamper the federal government's ability to fight crime. That means that legally any attempt to enforce thos sections would put those trying in direct violation of their own state law.




The avenues of recourse available to the executive branch of the government wouldn't be favorable towards the federal government:


All that would have to happen is the president tell the govenor to enforce her own laws. If she refused the DOJ could step in "independent" of the president and start a corruption probe. Then the president just sits back and watches as the top level is skimmed off and the chain of succession takes over. Special elections would be held for sherif and new mayors would apoint new police cheifs.

All it would take is a few dozen DOJ employees. There would be no need for troops or massive numbers of federal agents. It would be over and done before most people know what happened.


My point though was that there own law prevents them from ignoring the judge's order. If they ignore her order they are effectively hindering immigration enforcement by the federal government. At least that is the finding of the court. Plus they would potentially be affecting and deciding foreign policy (according to the judge) which is unconstitutional.

So, should Arizona violate its own law and the constitution?

I think they should just rewrite the "bad" sections of the law and resubmit it for a vote. It would be faster, cheaper, and would actually address the issues stated that make it illegal. The consensus in the legal field seems to be that a simple rewrite would make it legal and keep most of the teeth in the law.

Politicians have to grand stand though. It is an election year and somebody has to get crapped on. I bet if a cost analysis of continued fighting and simply rewriting was presented to Arizona'a citizens they would want a rewrite.

Four good lawyers could get together, and using the order as a guide, rewrite the controversial sections to be compliant in a weekend. If they started right now they could probably vote on it by Wednesday.

This is just another example of the politics of emotion being used to control groups and win favor.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:30 PM
link   
reply to post by MikeNice81
 


According to reports, Arizona law enforcement officers, received training by federal ICE personnel, in federal enforcement of federal immigration laws. This was paid for with stimulus money and was aimed at allowing State and local police to reinforce and expand the resources avalible to ICE to deal with ever increasing load.

“Part of the law that the governor signed makes it illegal for any "officials, agencies, and political subdivisions" to refuse to cooperate with or hinder federal laws and law enforcement.”

Arizona lawmakers would be derelict in their duty not only to the federal government but to the citizens of their state if they did not use state resources to attempt to enforce federal immigration laws, in lieu of the federal government’s inability to do so
The ruling the judge passed down limited Arizona as to what sections of its state law it could enforce. It did not in any way address the issue of state police enforcing federal law as it applies to Illegal immigration. Their trained for it, and until the federal government can respond with adequate resources to control this problem it has an obligation to do so.
Arizona lawmakers also take an oath to defend the people and the rights they as citizens have in their state.


Article 4 section 4 clause 2

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

The Executive of the state of Arizona as well as the legislature have made such Application and the federal government has failed to respond. It falls to the state governments as members of the federation of states, to see that federal laws are enforced and that the people of their state are protected, until such time as the federal government can address the crisis.



[edit on 7/30/2010 by Phedreus]



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:56 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 

According to this article it was all done in the wrong court by the wrong judge. This would mean that AZ still has it's law intact.

canadafreepress.com...



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:28 PM
link   
From what I'm hearing from my sources in Arizona, if you are someone in Arizona who shouldn't be in Arizona, you don't want to illegally spit on the streets.

You don't want to illegally pass gas downwind in Arizona.

You don't want to have a broken tail light.

You don't want to even walk down the street with a blood alcohol level of more than .01.

Not that I'm saying the Arizona law enforcement people are any more creative in arresting people than law enforcement people in any other state. But it sounds like the Arizona law enforcement people might be a little more motivated in finding a reason that could have you end up spending a couple hours in jail. If not the night. Not to forget mentioning that you could find yourself paying a fine for whatever infrction you committed.

Now, who was that rap artist who said something to really tick off the New York Police. Yeah, I think it was Lil Wayne. He said some things that really grated the New York Police the wrong way. Lil Wayne was set to perform in New York City. His people told him not to drive his road bus through New York City. Lil Wayne said he was not afraid of the New York Police.

Surprise! Surprise! Lil Wayne is doing prison time. The New York Police found illegal drugs on Lil Wayne's bus.

There's something to be said as a warning if you are prone to pizz off the police. And that word of warning is: don't go anywhere where the police can see you.

New York. Arizona. Texas. New Mexico. Florida. Georgia. Etc. Etc. Etc. It's a universal law.

The Arizona Police do not have to arrest illegals for being in Arizona illegally. There are soooooooo many other reasons the Arizona Police can arrest a body.

My advice to illegals: the protestors are getting arrested. The protestors aren't going to stay in Arizona forever. You might want to think about moving to Los Angeles rather than Arizona. Your life might go simpler that way.

I'm just saying in a matter of fact way.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:32 PM
link   
You know what, while I'm on the subject of what happens if you pizz off the police......it's not a universal law in just America.

My advice if you happen to be in Russia and you pizz off the Russian police...........

Yeah, no matter where you go in the world, you want to watch yourself with that pizzing off the police thing.


Russian SWAT (OMON) kill
www.youtube.com...



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 12:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by MikeNice81
...
All that would have to happen is the president tell the govenor to enforce her own laws. If she refused the DOJ could step in "independent" of the president and start a corruption probe. Then the president just sits back and watches as the top level is skimmed off and the chain of succession takes over. Special elections would be held for sherif and new mayors would apoint new police cheifs.

All it would take is a few dozen DOJ employees. There would be no need for troops or massive numbers of federal agents. It would be over and done before most people know what happened.

...


Nope, they could try and do an investigation. It would be all over the news. After due consideration they would decide whatever, and if it's adverse to Arizona, then Arizona would just say OK, we'll ignore that too.

What happens then -- US sends in troops? Everyone knows the Federal government doesn't appoint state government. That's what "federal" means and it's not completely dead.

US troops would strongly resist taking out the Arizona government.

When the next election rolls around, Jan Brewer doesn't run but endorses another candidate who is about the same as she is. Sort of like Putin / Medvedev. New administration, and Obama gets to start again ...

Your whole scenario has no precedent in US history that I know of. You're just making it up. In this country, the states are really not just subsidiaries of the central government.

They should not rewrite the law, because it's fine as is. It should not change, although if they can grease the wheels with some cosmetic changes, why not.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 12:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by fred call
From what I'm hearing from my sources in Arizona, if you are someone in Arizona who shouldn't be in Arizona, you don't want to illegally spit on the streets.

You don't want to illegally pass gas downwind in Arizona.
...


Let 'em try to make it go upwind.

Sounds like a place I'd like to go back to for vacation, or for living. I used to live in the Phoenix area and it was really going downhill, but this could be the turnaround. And I'm eating Arizona pistachios right now, instead of California almonds. Support the good guys!

[edit on 31-7-2010 by oniongrass]



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 12:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by SheaWolf
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 

According to this article it was all done in the wrong court by the wrong judge. This would mean that AZ still has it's law intact.

canadafreepress.com...


Article III, Sec. 2, clause 2 says:

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction.


GOOD CATCH!!!



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 12:49 AM
link   
Obama is thinking of votes for the democratic party. This issue will mobilize more votes on the Mexican side period.

I agree. Ignore the ruling. Press the Feds and watch how many states run to the side of Arizona. Funding. Arizona will withhold all Tax revenue to the Feds until a proper hearing.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 12:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by awakentired
Obama is thinking of votes for the democratic party. This issue will mobilize more votes on the Mexican side period.

I agree. Ignore the ruling. Press the Feds and watch how many states run to the side of Arizona. Funding. Arizona will withhold all Tax revenue to the Feds until a proper hearing.
One could only hope.

The Constitution alludes towards "checks and balances" but it seems the D.C. crowd forgets about the states. The states are the ultimate check and balance- we appoint delagates to the electoral college and certify our votes. It wouldn't be that hard for a state to change its rules and watch the other states adopt similar rules.

For instance, one State could adopt term limits for its representatives and congressional appointees. I can't see that being "unconstitutional" as there is no verbage in the Constitution granting indefinite appointage to such an official. And, considering the State must verify its appointed Congress-persons and Representatives, that by itself delgates that authority to the State.




top topics



 
10
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join