Arizona Immigration Law: Enforcement Blocked by Circuit Court

page: 1
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Arizona Immigration Law: Enforcement Blocked by Circuit Court


abcnews.go.com

A federal appeals court today blocked the enforcement of key provisions of Arizona's immigration law, considered one of the toughest in the nation.
A central provision of the law requires police officers to ask for immigration papers if they have a reasonable suspicion that the person they have stopped, detained or arrested is in the country illegally.
The Department of Justice sued the State of Arizona, arguing that the power to regulate immigration rests with the federal government and that
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 05:54 PM
link   
Apparently someone forgot to inform these judges that the Constitution grants the powers not delegated to the states to the people as well.

The 10th Amendment clearly depicts what the States can do:

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.

I have yet to see anything the grants the Federal Government power over the states when it comes to immigration. Yes the have laws pertaining too employment, but nothing within the Constitution that grants the power to supersede a states actions.

Now some would try to use the 14th Amendment as a basis of argument. How ever, that particular Amendment is Unconstitutional anyhow though it was signed and passed on the premise of something good.

it is argued that Congress has complete authority over immigration. But i have seen no such wording with the Constitution. Only articles that pertain to this topic.

Now USC § 1251. Original jurisdiction defines the governing authority over immigrants:
(a) The Supreme Court shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction of all controversies between two or more States.
(b) The Supreme Court shall have original but not exclusive jurisdiction of:
(1) All actions or proceedings to which ambassadors, other public ministers, consuls, or vice consuls of foreign states are parties;
(2) All controversies between the United States and a State;
(3) All actions or proceedings by a State against the citizens of another State or against aliens.

However, it is widely argued, in court even, that when the federal government fails to protect its borders by any means necessary, it is the Right of the State to take the reigns, for that respected states borders.

As noted above, the 10th Amendment supersedes the USC period. And that is the argument that is ongoing in the courts currently.

The Fact is, the Fed's have failed at their duties with our borders, immigration, and you can ( inset here ) the numerous amounts of failings in part by our Government. With that, I condone the actions of the state AZ., who are simply taking the necessary steps to secure the Southern Border, also to implement stability in the region, and halt all illegal immigration as well as illegal drug trafficking. Two birds with one stone.

May other states follow their example, and push for a more peaceful nation, one with lower population issues, and one with less gang related crime.






abcnews.go.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 06:00 PM
link   
Where can we read the decision? Was it unanimous?



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Analyze76
 


Its within the article:



Last July a District Court judge enjoined enforcement of the law, and today a panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that ruling.





Judge Richard Paez, writing for a split panel,



So apparently it was split for now. Its not over though. A split decision always opens the door for a judge to change their mind, and hopefully they do!
edit on 11-4-2011 by Whereweheaded because: (no reason given)


See above article reference.
edit on 11-4-2011 by Whereweheaded because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 06:06 PM
link   
no one makes too much of a fuss when black people are racially profiled, but when it comes to Mexicans who aren't even U.S. citizens, then there's this problem of racial profiling the federal government feels imperatively forced to protect citizens--er--illegal aliens from. Then the liberal media says it is discrimination against the Mexican-American citizens who are here legally, as if having to show a drivers license is such a horrible thing, this political correctness gone mad then turns into Arizona check points where everyone is then questioned if they are legal residents or not, as 4409 on youtube has documented. So there's really a whole lot of holes in the federal government's plan to not address the immigration issue, the best case scenario is the sleazy congressmen just want more democratic voters and hope they can control the immigration market during elections, the worst case scenario is the illegals will one day be rounded up in internment camps. Either way the real question is why the heck would you want to sneak into America! Most sane people are looking for ways to sneak out.



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
no one makes too much of a fuss when black people are racially profiled, but when it comes to Mexicans who aren't even U.S. citizens, then there's this problem of racial profiling the federal government feels imperatively forced to protect citizens--er--illegal aliens from. Then the liberal media says it is discrimination against the Mexican-American citizens who are here legally, as if having to show a drivers license is such a horrible thing, this political correctness gone mad then turns into Arizona check points where everyone is then questioned if they are legal residents or not, as 4409 on youtube has documented. So there's really a whole lot of holes in the federal government's plan to not address the immigration issue, the best case scenario is the sleazy congressmen just want more democratic voters and hope they can control the immigration market during elections, the worst case scenario is the illegals will one day be rounded up in internment camps. Either way the real question is why the heck would you want to sneak into America! Most sane people are looking for ways to sneak out.


The intent is Bolshelvism
This is a study of it.
Winston Churchill



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 06:31 PM
link   
All circuit court officials need to be terminated from their positions immediately



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 06:35 PM
link   
reply to post by brindle
 


Yup, this should have been a slam dunk for Arizona. Borders would be secure, no more illegals would be attempting to walk through the door. Would have taken care of so many concerns from that region, but you gotta love them liberal judges....make decisions not based off of the Constitution, but rather decisions based off of emotion, under the premise of Humanitarian efforts.



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 07:17 PM
link   
Apparently someone forgot to read the Tax Law to discover that "Illegal Alien" is an IRS issue for the collection of taxes, and has nothing to do with crossing a border. Which is why the States lack the authority to enforce FEDERAL TAX LAW.

So everyone turned it into a racial/security issue as an excuse.



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 07:58 PM
link   
April 1, 2011

JW Sues DHS — Twice! — for Records Detailing Obama “Stealth Amnesty” Plan



"As you know if you’ve been reading this space for some time, the Obama administration has been heavily criticized for its alleged plan to bypass Congress and enact “stealth amnesty” by executive fiat. In fact, in June 2010, the press uncovered a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service “draft” memo that outlined a variety of ways to grant legalization to illegal aliens without going through Congress. A couple of months later we learned this “stealth amnesty” plan was not a theoretical exercise. It was already in full operation."

"According to the August 24, 2010, edition of The Houston Chronicle: “The Department of Homeland Security is systematically reviewing thousands of pending immigration cases and moving to dismiss those filed against suspected illegal immigrants who have no serious criminal records…Culling the immigration court system dockets of noncriminals started in earnest in Houston about a month ago and has stunned local immigration attorneys, who have reported coming to court anticipating clients’ deportations only to learn that the government was dismissing the cases.”

Is it any wonder why we are being invaded with vast amounts of illegal immigrants? Clearly, Obama wants them here. It doesn't matter to him that millions of our people are without jobs or a way to provide for their families.




www.judicialwatch.org...
edit on 11-4-2011 by Night Star because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 09:06 PM
link   
this is some major bs arizonia should be able to enforce its own border

state rights mean nothing to anyone in washington

and with the idiotic rulings such as these occur is it any wonder why americans cannot not sit foot on their own lands such as the 5,500 acres in arizona overrun by drug cartels and illegals.

www.zimbio.com...


the law is the law deal with it come here legally and stop depriving americans of their own property
edit on 11-4-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 09:37 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
no one makes too much of a fuss when black people are racially profiled, but when it comes to Mexicans who aren't even U.S. citizens, then there's this problem of racial profiling the federal government feels imperatively forced to protect citizens--er--illegal aliens from.


tell me how you can look at one Mexican-American and identify him/her from an illegal Mexican immigrant. You can't, so therefore the law makes a very short, slippery slope to detain citizens who happen to resemble an illegal alien.

Can we say discrimination here? It is, whether you realize it or not. Black Americans are not being questioned due to their legal status, so therefore comparing the very real plight of racial profiling to the illegal search and detaining of Mexican Americans is very different. A civil or criminal matter is one thing, but this one in essence makes any brown person's citizen status suspect, which does breach our civil rights.


Then the liberal media says it is discrimination against the Mexican-American citizens who are here legally, as if having to show a drivers license is such a horrible thing, this political correctness gone mad then turns into Arizona check points where everyone is then questioned if they are legal residents or not, as 4409 on youtube has documented.


My Fourth Amendment right to unreasonable search and seizure trumps your outrage. Deal with it. I have my rights too, and if you truly are conservative, then you should be up in arms against any government intervention into a person's right to travel unmolested.

Oh, wait... the G is only good if its unfair to the people YOU don't like.


So there's really a whole lot of holes in the federal government's plan to not address the immigration issue, the best case scenario is the sleazy congressmen just want more democratic voters and hope they can control the immigration market during elections, the worst case scenario is the illegals will one day be rounded up in internment camps. Either way the real question is why the heck would you want to sneak into America! Most sane people are looking for ways to sneak out.


By all means, sneak out if you feel it. Once again, if you are truly conservative (more freedom, less government, rights to the citizens) then any of this should be as abhorrent to you as the so-called liberalism you hate, which seems more interested in protecting people's rights than any conservative agenda I've seen, which seems dead set on stripping rights to privacy and personal choice.

I will say, that in order to do right, everything it starts with must be right. Beginnings are important, and this taint of discrimination will doom any good this legislation might do to being another corrupt use of power against those who have little power.

And that is why my fourth amendment rights trumps your outrage.
edit on 13/4/11 by MagoSA because: forgot a backslash
edit on 13/4/11 by MagoSA because: spelling booboo - yes, I hate those, too. if it's worth writing, it's worth proper spelling.



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 11:52 AM
link   
If we wait too much longer to get this case to the Supreme Court, Bill Ayers will be appointed chief justice.

Would they really, really replace Clarence Thomas with Jeremiah Wright? You bet they would, given half a chance.



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 12:06 PM
link   


A central provision of the law requires police officers to ask for immigration papers if they have a reasonable suspicion that the person they have stopped, detained or arrested is in the country illegally.


I may even understand opposition to arbitrarily stopping people just to check their citizenship. But when detained or arrested? Immigration check should be automatic in these circumstances!



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by MagoSA
 


It would benefit you greatly to actually read the law and not rely on MSNBC for your opinions.

The law doesn't grant police the powers to just stop and demand citizenship proof from anyone. It authorizes police to investigate citizenship status AFTER someone has already been detained.

Comprende`?



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by MagoSA
 





which does breach our civil rights.


You do realize that those who are immigrants, according to our Constitution have no rights, therefore your civil rights would not have been breached.



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by ViperChili
reply to post by MagoSA
 


It would benefit you greatly to actually read the law and not rely on MSNBC for your opinions.

The law doesn't grant police the powers to just stop and demand citizenship proof from anyone. It authorizes police to investigate citizenship status AFTER someone has already been detained.

Comprende`?


...After someone has already been detained for what exactly? Suspicion of citizenship or does it have to an actual legitimate OTHER reason first? Is there a way to enforce that?


Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by MagoSA
 





which does breach our civil rights.


You do realize that those who are immigrants, according to our Constitution have no rights, therefore your civil rights would not have been breached.


Immigrants have no rights according to our constitution? What was all that Ellis Island nonsense about?



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 05:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Sinnthia
 





What was all that Ellis Island nonsense about?


What years would you like to discuss? You do know there was a pre-immigration period right?



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Sinnthia
 


The bill required a legitimate reason (detainment, arrest, questioning, etc etc).

The entire notion of police just stopping all brown people and demanding proof of citizenship is simply a falsehood put out there by those opposed to the bill. Call it a scare tactic if you will.





new topics
top topics
 
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join