USA Today / ACLU tell illegals what to do if ICE comes knocking

originally posted by: namehere
no i'm not even conservative to begin with but it bothers me when people justify trampling on the constitution to project their misguided political opinions onto the law, jurisdiction only implies legal citizenship not presence.

Who is trampling on the Constitution? The hundreds of judges citing it? If you disagree with them why not file a petition?

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

your saying there is no criminal speeding, that is wrong. just because it is called traffic court doesn't mean it doesn't pertain to criminal cases. i went to traffic court with my DUI's they were certainly a criminal case. the same applies criminal speeding/reckless driving.

another example of crimanls traffic offensive.

tell you what get out on the interstate and break the speed limit by 35mph plus or more and see what kind of ticket you get, better yet do it in a school zone.

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
your saying there is no criminal speeding, that is wrong.

No, I did not.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

your words,

It is still not a criminal offense, you do not go to criminal court when contesting a typical parking or speeding ticket, you go to traffic court[/color].

care to explain them, you said it's not.

and your very first post,about speeding.

Vehicular offenses like speeding and parking are not criminal offenses.

care to explain them, you said it's not. i have shown your wrong yet you continue to argue over it.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

Do you know what the word 'typical' means?

originally posted by: WilliamtheResolute
a reply to: FauxMulder

I think your OP illustrates that the foundation of the ACLU was un-American and remains so, the following quote is the founders statement:

"I am for socialism, disarmament and ultimately for abolishing the state itself as an instrument of violence and compulsion. I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class and sole control by those who produce wealth. Communism is, of course, the goal.” ACLU founder Roger Baldwin, 1935

And how many of the founding fathers were slave owners? And Henry Ford was a notorious anti-Semite...Your point?

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: WilliamtheResolute
a reply to: FauxMulder

I think your OP illustrates that the foundation of the ACLU was un-American and remains so, the following quote is the founders statement:

"I am for socialism, disarmament and ultimately for abolishing the state itself as an instrument of violence and compulsion. I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class and sole control by those who produce wealth. Communism is, of course, the goal.” ACLU founder Roger Baldwin, 1935

"And how many of the founding fathers were slave owners? And Henry Ford was a notorious anti-Semite...Your point?" [



Wow, I think you just made my point.......are you an ACLU member?

edit on 12-2-2017 by WilliamtheResolute because: (no reason given)

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: WilliamtheResolute
a reply to: FauxMulder

I think your OP illustrates that the foundation of the ACLU was un-American and remains so, the following quote is the founders statement:

"I am for socialism, disarmament and ultimately for abolishing the state itself as an instrument of violence and compulsion. I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class and sole control by those who produce wealth. Communism is, of course, the goal.” ACLU founder Roger Baldwin, 1935

And how many of the founding fathers were slave owners? And Henry Ford was a notorious anti-Semite...Your point?

Wow, I think you just made my point....you must be an ACLU member.

If your an illegal you have no rights case closed. All they need is a search warrant for the address. You have to prove your legal. If not your arrested.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

yes, the court itself is no longer working as it was meant to and has become about political leanings instead of preserving the constitution.

as for why i don't do anything is simple really, i'm too poor and who could i possibly go to for representation who is politically neutral who would possibly support such a grand case which could upturn the whole legal system? i'm not an idiot who can't see the destructive political divisions in this country or how powerful entities have a stranglehold on the system as it is.

people like me who are real moderates and actually care about the constitution are caught between extremes and can only keep our head down, hide our real opinions and helplessly watch these extremes tear everything apart like idiots because their uncontrolled feelings of "i'm right and you're wrong".

i'm sick of most of america and think they all need slapped a few times to stop acting like children who can't get their way all the time.

america = big whiny spoiled babies.

originally posted by: namehere
yes, the court itself is no longer working as it was meant to and has become about political leanings instead of preserving the constitution.

I see, the entire court system has not been working since the mid to late 1800's because you think people should not get due process. Sounds reasonable.

originally posted by: tribal
i have no problem with this. People should know their rights, especially if they are here illegally. I have no idea what kinds of people are being "rounded up", but i certainly hope its not moms and dads just going about their business. If Trump wants to lose a lot of potential supporters i cant think of many better ways to do it than targeting otherwise law abiding people.

ICE is going after those with criminal records, but if other illegals are in the net then they go too.

originally posted by: tribal
i have no problem with this. People should know their rights, especially if they are here illegally. I have no idea what kinds of people are being "rounded up", but i certainly hope its not moms and dads just going about their business. If Trump wants to lose a lot of potential supporters i cant think of many better ways to do it than targeting otherwise law abiding people.

ICE is going after those with criminal records, but if other illegals are in the net then they go too.

originally posted by: tribal
i have no problem with this. People should know their rights, especially if they are here illegally. I have no idea what kinds of people are being "rounded up", but i certainly hope its not moms and dads just going about their business. If Trump wants to lose a lot of potential supporters i cant think of many better ways to do it than targeting otherwise law abiding people.

ICE is going after those with criminal records, but if other illegals are in the net then they go too.

a reply to: Arnie123

As long as they are on US soil they do.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

do you not listen on purpose or something? i'm saying the system is full of contradiction and loopholes which were created by judges on personal crusades of justice, bent on their own political beliefs.

if they are illegal residents and cannot vote why should they be guaranteed any other right? yes they should be bound by the law but be provided no constitutional protections and be deported if they haven't entered to apply for legal residence or have no permit to enter or no sponsorship of a citizen.

law abiding foreigners are welcome not illegal aliens who can't respect immigration law and have no intention to become an american citizen and are only loyal to foreign agents.

originally posted by: namehere
do you not listen on purpose or something?

I hear just fine, it would appear you are the one not paying attention to a great many things.

i'm saying the system is full of contradiction and loopholes which were created by judges on personal crusades of justice, bent on their own political beliefs.

Once again, these hundreds of judges, all citing the same cases and all appointed by both Republicans and Democrats
are on personal crusades lasting well over a century?

if they are illegal residents and cannot vote why should they be guaranteed any other right?

Because in hundreds of court cases it was made clear that the 14th Amendment applies to citizens and non-citizens alike. Pay attention.

originally posted by: DaveButts

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Illegal aliens have rights.

But if you've been jailed for pot, you can't own a gun or vote.

When ice is knocking on doors they only have accusations that their target is illegal. And just like with any crime investigation (including the pot head) the accused is presumed innocent until they are proven otherwise.

Nown that pot head of yours; prior to going to jail and loosing his right to vote; he did have a right to refuse entry into his home to an LO with out a warrant. And he had the right to reman silent.

Then why would they need a flyer to tell them how to handle ICE? It would seem this is more of a resisting arrest. If they are not illegal then opening the door and talking to ice does nothing for ice and they move on. However i can see people not wanting to allow them access to their house if legal but they house illegal immigrants in the house then that would be ok. However these people can be considered aiding and abetting crimmals.

This isnt a smart idea and will compound the problem drawing americans into the court "what aclu wants". So if ICE shows up to your house asks to come in and suspects an illegal immigrant of living their all they need in proof even if you tell them to leave and won't answer the door. The second a illegal immigrant walks out of these peoples houses its over.

originally posted by: Arnie123
Illegals have rights?

Actually, yes.

The critics all claim that undocumented workers or immigrants or migrants — whichever label is the flavor of the day — don't have legal rights because they are lawbreakers by entering the country illegally and owe no loyalty to the United States. They claim that only U.S. citizens (natural born or naturalized) are protected by the Constitution. The critics are not only wrong — they are really, truly and sincerely wrong.

The U.S. Supreme Court settled the issue well over a century ago. But even before the court laid the issue to rest, a principal author of the Constitution, James Madison, the second president of the United States, wrote: "that as they [aliens], owe, on the one hand, a temporary obedience, they are entitled, in return, to their [constitutional] protection and advantage." More recently, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Zadvydas v. Davis (2001) that "due process" of the 14th Amendment applies to all aliens in the United States whose presence maybe or is "unlawful, involuntary or transitory."

The Hill

originally posted by: darkbake

James Madison, the second president of the United States...

Oooph. That is a big historical blunder right there.