Arizona Governor to countersue U.S. government over immigration enforcement!

[Againsheila]

I'm sorry, but how is that a matter for the ballot? Is the well-being and survival of Arizona, and whether or not the federal government does its duty by Arizona, to be subject to the voting whims of Massachusetts? Lots of nice New England liberals feel warm and fuzzy and righteous in their sympathy for the "poor, downtrodden" illegals they'll never see, so we're supposed to sacrifice our lives, our safety, and our property for their short-sighted voting choices? I don't think so.

I'd say this is, essentially, a breach of contract suit, based on the federal government's refusal to honor its legal obligations to the state of Arizona.

When elected officials do not do their job as well as you would want them to do so, you vote for someone else next time around. See how that works? It's called democracy. No, it's not a breach of contract suit, because there is no contract. It is about the relationship between the state government and federal government, with the state government complaining about the way the federal government exercises its legal powers, and executes its laws. Nothing that the suit complains about is outside of the federal government's power to do or not do. It is federal law, and the federal government gets to decide how to execute those laws. If the people of Arizona don't like the way the government is being run, they should vote for someone else.

The federal government is refusing to enforce it's own laws. Arizona passes a law so they can enforce the federal law and the federal government sues Arizona for being so presumptuous and to insist that if they aren't going to enforce their own law, the state will. The state has launched a counter suit because the government is not only refusing to enforce their own laws but refusing to allow the states to do so. At this point, it's not a matter of electing someone else, remember we aren't a democracy we are a republic. If the repbulic isn't working and the court system doesn't work, Arizona's only choice will be to get out of the republic, a right provided for it by the Declaration of Independence but refused it by the Union. The result will be another civil war. IMO, the government should just enforce it's own laws and the whole problem will be solved but unfortunately those in office are owned by big business and they want the illegals. Remember, American's have limited their birthrate to less than replacement value, if it weren't for the immigrants, both legal and illegal, right now the income gap would be much much smaller as the lower wage jobs would have gone up as the lower wage population decreased.

What we have now has resulted in a Fascist state.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

WTG Mrs. Brewer! I really like this woman. Taking on the Feds wont be easy. She's got huge cajones. The Federal Government has been terribly negligent on securing the border. I'm really rooting for Mrs. Brewer. You go girl!

 

[AmericanFirst]

I think it's awesome... add this to the admin being held in contempt for failure to adhere to a lawful court order and Obamacare being declared null and void.

What a record!

Yeah, incompetence on steroids.

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

Jay Sekulow is a noted Constitutional attorney who has argued NUMEROUS cases before the SCOTUS. I'll take his word over yours any other self appointed legal expert any day.

Jay Alan Sekulow - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And that still does not change the fact that just because this guy is arguing a case that the CBN has paid him to argue to their audience, does not mean that it is a ultimately a true interpretation of law. It is an argument, one that he has been directed to make. That is what lawyers do when you hire them.

HE ARGUES CASES BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA you dumbass. WTF?! Who gives a shit WHO USE to pay him??? Who gives a shit who pays him now?? Do you know what it takes to argue before the SCOTUS???!! Come on dummy, being you know it all.. tell us.

 

[shintao]

"She said that no taxpayer money would be spent on the claim, and that she has set up a website to raise funds: keepazsafe.com .

Brewer said she has already raised $3.7 million."




Gov. Jan Brewer announces Arizona to file counter claim against US government

Finally going to do something American. Good for her.

 

[AquaAthena]

Jan Brewer is one fine soldier. I would definitely want her on my side, for any reason. Awesome human being. Loyal and with a determined grace, she goes forth.

 

[gekaap]

The federal government is refusing to enforce it's own laws. Arizona passes a law so they can enforce the federal law and the federal government sues Arizona for being so presumptuous and to insist that if they aren't going to enforce their own law, the state will. The state has launched a counter suit because the government is not only refusing to enforce their own laws but refusing to allow the states to do so. At this point, it's not a matter of electing someone else, remember we aren't a democracy we are a republic. If the repbulic isn't working and the court system doesn't work, Arizona's only choice will be to get out of the republic, a right provided for it by the Declaration of Independence but refused it by the Union. The result will be another civil war. IMO, the government should just enforce it's own laws and the whole problem will be solved but unfortunately those in office are owned by big business and they want the illegals. Remember, American's have limited their birthrate to less than replacement value, if it weren't for the immigrants, both legal and illegal, right now the income gap would be much much smaller as the lower wage jobs would have gone up as the lower wage population decreased.

All you are doing is complaining about that which is in the federal government's rights to decide to do, and the fact that Arizona is bound by the constitution. If you don't like the actions of elected officials, then don't vote for them. It's really that simple. I am well aware of the damage illegal immigration does to our country, and it irritates the Hell out of me that the only thing weaker than our immigration laws is our enforcement. But none of that amounts to a legal case. And AZ has no case.

What we have now has resulted in a Fascist state.

Wait a second, the result of lax immigration policy is a fascist state? Don't use words when you don't know what they mean.

 

[gekaap]

HE ARGUES CASES BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA you dumbass. WTF?! Who gives a shit WHO USE to pay him??? Who gives a shit who pays him now?? Do you know what it takes to argue before the SCOTUS???!! Come on dummy, being you know it all.. tell us.

You're just not getting it. The reason he wrote that piece is because he was HIRED BY CBN TO ARGUE IN FAVOR OF AZ. I'm not questioning his line of work. I'm just pointing out that the fact that the fact that he is a lawyer who has argued before the SCOTUS does not establish his article as having any authority when the arguments his employer directed him to support a specific conclusion. It ends up being question begging.

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

HE ARGUES CASES BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA you dumbass. WTF?! Who gives a shit WHO USE to pay him??? Who gives a shit who pays him now?? Do you know what it takes to argue before the SCOTUS???!! Come on dummy, being you know it all.. tell us.

You're just not getting it. The reason he wrote that piece is because he was HIRED BY CBN TO ARGUE IN FAVOR OF AZ. I'm not questioning his line of work. I'm just pointing out that the fact that the fact that he is a lawyer who has argued before the SCOTUS does not establish his article as having any authority when the arguments his employer directed him to support a specific conclusion. It ends up being question begging.

No, YOU'RE not getting it. He knows the law. He's an EXPERT on Constitutional Law and has backed Jan Brewer all the way to include citing the precedent which establishes causation in the countersuit. The state of Arizona has every right under the Constitution of the United States to countersue the Federal Government established in the 10th amendment. Here are the 5 counts in the lawsuit:

1. Failure to obtain operational control of the border
2. Failure to enforce immigration laws
3. Failure to protect Arizona from harm from immigration
4. Failure to reimburse Arizona for more than $763 million in costs for incarceration of criminal aliens
5. Violating Arizona’s 10th Amendment, failure to protect Arizona citizens’ welfare

The Obama Administration is in violation of the 11th Amendment which states:

The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or Equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State

This isn't rocket science you know.. it's a clear understanding of the Constitution, something which you need to go back and read.. THOROUGHLY I MIGHT ADD!

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

HE ARGUES CASES BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA you dumbass. WTF?! Who gives a shit WHO USE to pay him??? Who gives a shit who pays him now?? Do you know what it takes to argue before the SCOTUS???!! Come on dummy, being you know it all.. tell us.

You're just not getting it. The reason he wrote that piece is because he was HIRED BY CBN TO ARGUE IN FAVOR OF AZ. I'm not questioning his line of work. I'm just pointing out that the fact that the fact that he is a lawyer who has argued before the SCOTUS does not establish his article as having any authority when the arguments his employer directed him to support a specific conclusion. It ends up being question begging.

What in the shit are you talking about??! "It ends up being question begging." WTF IS THAT and what does it mean???

 

[gekaap]

No, YOU'RE not getting it. He knows the law. He's an EXPERT on Constitutional Law and has backed Jan Brewer all the way to include citing the precedent which establishes causation in the countersuit. The state of Arizona has every right under the Constitution of the United States to countersue the Federal Government established in the 10th amendment. Here are the 5 counts in the lawsuit:

1. Failure to obtain operational control of the border
2. Failure to enforce immigration laws
3. Failure to protect Arizona from harm from immigration
4. Failure to reimburse Arizona for more than $763 million in costs for incarceration of criminal aliens
5. Violating Arizona’s 10th Amendment, failure to protect Arizona citizens’ welfare

The Obama Administration is in violation of the 11th Amendment which states:

The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or Equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State

This isn't rocket science you know.. it's a clear understanding of the Constitution, something which you need to go back and read.. THOROUGHLY I MIGHT ADD!

Wait a second, when did I ever say that they don't have the right to counter sue? I never said that at all. I said I don't think they'll win in the end. Keep up or go home.

 

[gekaap]

What in the shit are you talking about??! "It ends up being question begging." WTF IS THAT and what does it mean???

Seriously, you have lost all relevance with that comment. Go get yourself educated, and come back in 5-7 years.

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

What in the shit are you talking about??! "It ends up being question begging." WTF IS THAT and what does it mean???

Seriously, you have lost all relevance with that comment. Go get yourself educated, and come back in 5-7 years.

I quoted your statement DUMBASS.. My gawd, don't you even remember what the hell you're saying?? Are you stoned or something?

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

Here's your post and your stupid nonsensical response:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/immig...er-immigration-enforcement-4.html#post3312064

 

[Angelhair]

what the fxxk kind of President sues a state that HE REPRESENTS?

I'm not sure I've ever seen anything like this.

This kind of thing happens when the people elect a president who does not give a hoot about the country he was elected to PROTECT!!!! Oh yes, and the Muslim Brotherhood is also a welcome force in the eyes of this administartion. Does that tell anybody anything in this country???

 

[Againsheila]

The federal government is refusing to enforce it's own laws. Arizona passes a law so they can enforce the federal law and the federal government sues Arizona for being so presumptuous and to insist that if they aren't going to enforce their own law, the state will. The state has launched a counter suit because the government is not only refusing to enforce their own laws but refusing to allow the states to do so. At this point, it's not a matter of electing someone else, remember we aren't a democracy we are a republic. If the repbulic isn't working and the court system doesn't work, Arizona's only choice will be to get out of the republic, a right provided for it by the Declaration of Independence but refused it by the Union. The result will be another civil war. IMO, the government should just enforce it's own laws and the whole problem will be solved but unfortunately those in office are owned by big business and they want the illegals. Remember, American's have limited their birthrate to less than replacement value, if it weren't for the immigrants, both legal and illegal, right now the income gap would be much much smaller as the lower wage jobs would have gone up as the lower wage population decreased.

All you are doing is complaining about that which is in the federal government's rights to decide to do, and the fact that Arizona is bound by the constitution. If you don't like the actions of elected officials, then don't vote for them. It's really that simple. I am well aware of the damage illegal immigration does to our country, and it irritates the Hell out of me that the only thing weaker than our immigration laws is our enforcement. But none of that amounts to a legal case. And AZ has no case.

What we have now has resulted in a Fascist state.

Wait a second, the result of lax immigration policy is a fascist state? Don't use words when you don't know what they mean.

"don't vote for them?" who the heck are you kidding. WE don't have a choice. Have you checked your ballot lately? The dems and reps are both owned by the corps. No 3rd choice allowed...I've voted 3rd choice for the past several years and they are NEVER elected. WHY? Because people like you claim we have a "choice" and are so enamored of the two parties you don't realize that they are the most corrupt parties in the history of our nation.

A government that doesn't follow it's own laws and refuses to provide for the welfare of it's citizens while insuring that the uber wealthy become even more wealthy, is a fascist government.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I guess that little oath thing when they assume office, you know.. to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, doesn't mean shit to you?!

Protect and defend the constitution....How is the constitution not protected or defended because the federal government did not do things the way a given state wants?

The state of Arizona is not asking for some weird, outlandish, special procedure. They're just asking that the federal government enforce ITS OWN LAWS. That it defend the United States' sovereignty and in so doing, also defend Arizona's sovereignty.

Which is what it's supposed to do, anyway.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Neither lawsuit will go anywhere of course. The feds sued Arizona because Arizona usurped federal duties when they passed their latest anti-immigration laws (more to come by the way) and Arizona sued because they do not feel the feds do their job(s). Meanwhile nobody mentions that illegal immigration is lower than it has been for years so somebody must be doing something. Napolitano ,who has been on both sides of this fight, says it's the feds. Arizona conveniently ignores this fact. Both parties should work on things that mean something like budgets that are way out of whack here in Arizona and employment for the feds.But that does not get them any brownie-points with the voters. Lawsuits do! Especially here in Arizona.

1) Arizona didn't usurp jackshit.

2) The feds DON'T do their job.

3) Yeah, someone IS doing something. The border states are becoming more frustrated, less tolerant, and more willing to crack down on lawbreakers.

4) Arizona conveniently ignores what Napolitano says because we know her. She's a shameless partisan hack with an agenda.

5) "Down" isn't good enough when you consider the insane levels it's "down" from.

 

[gekaap]

"don't vote for them?" who the heck are you kidding. WE don't have a choice. Have you checked your ballot lately? The dems and reps are both owned by the corps.

Then don't vote for them. There are third party candidates that are available in many races.

No 3rd choice allowed...I've voted 3rd choice for the past several years and they are NEVER elected. WHY? Because people like you claim we have a "choice" and are so enamored of the two parties you don't realize that they are the most corrupt parties in the history of our nation.

Actually, people like me often vote for third parties, or perhaps even write in candidates. I wrote in Mitt Romney for President in 2008. I'm not inclined to simply settle for voting in those people I don't like. The real problem is that people like YOU simply give in and whine that you have no choice. Victimhood is not supposed to be part of the conservative lexicon, so I don't see why AZ is whining about things.

A government that doesn't follow it's own laws and refuses to provide for the welfare of it's citizens while insuring that the uber wealthy become even more wealthy, is a fascist government.

You don't know the meaning of fascist, so stop using the word. Fascism is a system of government where a state operates as a single party totalitarian system which suppresses all opposition to the government. A fascist society considers the establishment of a state to be the highest and most moral accomplishment of humanity, and advocates violence as a means of rejuvenation for the society. It strongly advocates nationalism as a the only way to establish identify of a culture, and demands compulsory military service as a means of spreading nationalist sentiment. Fascism believes that a corporatist economy run by elite military personnel is necessary in order to eliminate economic castes, and thereby promote national cohesion, as well as a harmonious economic base for the state. Now ask yourself, what is more like this model....a federal government that establishes minimal immigration policy, and lax enforcement, in turn allowing widespread usage of illegal labor in the free market arena, much to the detriment of its citizens, while expecting state level governments to be largely responsible for managing the localized fallout? Or a state government that takes a staunch anti-immigration positions, demands the federal government to take a greater role toward that end, and wants to send the military to secure the border?

After WWII, the term "fascist" began being widely used as a general term to identify nearly anything negative or undesirable (much as you have done). It is so widely used in so many differing contexts, that many people consider the word today to have virtually no meaning whatsoever.

 

[gekaap]

The state of Arizona is not asking for some weird, outlandish, special procedure. They're just asking that the federal government enforce ITS OWN LAWS. That it defend the United States' sovereignty and in so doing, also defend Arizona's sovereignty.

Which is what it's supposed to do, anyway.

I'm not saying that such wishes are undesirable or wrong. What I am saying is that if the people of AZ are not satisfied with the priorities that the federal government has adopted, then its recourse is through the democratic process of electing members of Congress who will do a better job of advocating for their state's interests, and by voting for Presidential candidates that support similar priorities as those of the people of AZ. Their lawsuit will not get them what they want, because any intervention by the judiciary would be an unconstitutional violation of separation of powers.