saveliberty
Diamond Member
- Oct 12, 2009
- 58,756
- 10,835
- 2,030
Seems to be addressing illegal immigration enough to send illegals running from Arizona.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
"And now, New York Senator Charles Schumer, Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, and the Democrats are threatening to force a floor vote on legislation that would invalidate the Arizona law if it is upheld by the highest court in the land.
Well, Chucky, go for it."
Dems Vow to Kill AZ Immigration Law?...GO FOR IT. - San Francisco Immigration | Examiner.com
Senator Charles Schumer of New York said his measure will make clear that Congress doesnt intend for states to enact their own immigration enforcement strategies. He said it will allow states to apprehend suspected illegal immigrants only as part of an agreement overseen by the federal government.
States like Arizona and Alabama will no longer be able to get away with saying they are simply helping the federal government to enforce the law, he said during a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing on state and local enforcement of immigration laws. Those states are writing their own laws and knowingly deploying untrained officers with a mission of arresting anyone and everyone who might fit the preconceived profile of an illegal immigrant, he said.
Schumer Drafts Bill to Block Arizona Immigration Crackdown - Businessweek
[Is Donald Verilli that bad a lawyer, or are the cases his bosses, Obama and Holder, are asking him to argue that ridiculiously contemptible? The Big "O" has no intention of enforcing this nations immigration laws because he wants to dilute out those people that hold this nation's heritage, traditions, founders, and its Constitution with some respect. It is especially so because Mr Obama has absolutely no respect himself for any one of them, his ego the size of Michael Moore's @ss.]
"At that time, the local bar was buzzing about a lawyer who had a really bad day in court: he was kicked to death by a moose in the parking lot of the federal courthouse in Anchorage. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli didnt have that bad a day today in the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that Arizonas immigration law is invalid by virtue of federal pre-emption, but he was kicked about a good bit by the justices.
On Twitter, Byron York asked: Question for legal types: Is Donald Verrilli bad at his job or just burdened by having to defend the indefensible? You can read the entire argument here and draw your own conclusions, but in my opinion, the problem was not with Verrilli but rather with the quality of the arguments that he was required to make by his client, the Obama administration.
Justice Sotomayor was commenting here on an extraordinary aspect of the Obama administrations position, to the effect that it is OK if individual Arizona law enforcement officers decide to cooperate with federal immigration authorities, but if the state directs them all to cooperate, it is somehow unconstitutional. The Obama administration literally argued that for a state to engage in systematic cooperation with the federal government on immigration is unlawful. We cant blame Mr. Verrilli for his inability to sell that bizarre argument. We do blame Barack Obama and Eric Holder for trying to assert it.
Of course, what is going on here is that the Obama administration doesnt want to enforce the immigration laws that Congress has enacted. The essence of its position in the Arizona case is that the federal government has the right to decide not to enforce the law, and if it so decides, then no state has the power, under the Constitution, to do anything that would tend to enforce those federal laws. So if the Obama administration decides that it will gain political advantage by ignoring federal laws against illegal immigration, states like Arizona just have to take the consequences without complaining
That propositionthe real essence of the Obama administrations caseis not one that can survive the light of day. Thus, near the end of Verrillis argument, Justice Kennedy cut to the chase:
JUSTICE KENNEDY: So youre saying the government has a legitimate interest in not enforcing its laws?
GENERAL VERRILLI: No. We have a legitimate interest in enforcing the law, of course, but it needs to be but these this Court has said over and over again, has recognized that the the balance of interest that has to be achieved in enforcing the the immigration laws is exceedingly delicate and complex, and it involves consideration of foreign relations, it involves humanitarian concerns, and it also involves public order and public
That answer was incoherent, obviously, but not because Verrilli is a fool; rather, because the Obama administrations position is indefensible."
A Bad Day In Court for the Obama Administration | Power Line
Are you talking about the same Chuck-yu Schummer? From NY?True.Senator Charles Schumer of New York said his measure will make clear that Congress doesnt intend for states to enact their own immigration enforcement strategies. He said it will allow states to apprehend suspected illegal immigrants only as part of an agreement overseen by the federal government.
States like Arizona and Alabama will no longer be able to get away with saying they are simply helping the federal government to enforce the law, he said during a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing on state and local enforcement of immigration laws. Those states are writing their own laws and knowingly deploying untrained officers with a mission of arresting anyone and everyone who might fit the preconceived profile of an illegal immigrant, he said.
Schumer Drafts Bill to Block Arizona Immigration Crackdown - Businessweek
This attack of the Constitution and individual liberty was initiated by the radical right, conservatives shouldnt be surprised when defenders of the Constitution and its case law fight back.
"And now, New York Senator Charles Schumer, Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, and the Democrats are threatening to force a floor vote on legislation that would invalidate the Arizona law if it is upheld by the highest court in the land.
Well, Chucky, go for it."
Dems Vow to Kill AZ Immigration Law?...GO FOR IT. - San Francisco Immigration | Examiner.com
good for chuck... it won't pass because the repubs will block it.
but that's ok... it reminds hispanic voters what the right thinks of them... you know, while they try to use rubio to bridge a 70 point gap. *shrug*