Right Wing Reality & The Us Constitution

Discussion in 'Immigration/Illegal Immigration' started by Dante, May 26, 2010.

  1. Dante
    Offline

    Dante On leave Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    52,463
    Thanks Received:
    3,324
    Trophy Points:
    1,825
    Location:
    On leave
    Ratings:
    +6,054
    What is it that makes crazy right wingers re-frame things like this, "There is no Constitutional authority that the Fed has authority over illegal immigration." as if they are hiding what they are really saying?

    Most rational people know the federal government is in charge of immigration policy and law.

    here is an opinion people may want to look at and consider...
    Things That Are Not In the U.S. Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net
    Things That Are Not In the U.S. Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net
     
  2. Cecilie1200
    Offline

    Cecilie1200 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2008
    Messages:
    26,879
    Thanks Received:
    3,720
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +7,052
    Is it amusing to anyone else to hear the same group of people who were on here staunchly defending the Constitutionality of Obamacare now attacking SB 1070 - or anything else, for that matter - as Unconstitutional?
     
  3. Oddball
    Offline

    Oddball BANNED Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    41,428
    Thanks Received:
    8,397
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
    Ratings:
    +8,409
    Socialist dirtbags don't give a hoot in hell about the Constitution, until one of its few vagaries give them the ever-so-conveeeenient canard to float.
     
  4. Dante
    Offline

    Dante On leave Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    52,463
    Thanks Received:
    3,324
    Trophy Points:
    1,825
    Location:
    On leave
    Ratings:
    +6,054
    Speak English -- and show some ID.
     
  5. American Horse
    Offline

    American Horse AKA "Mustang"

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    5,741
    Thanks Received:
    892
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Location:
    The Hoosier Heartland
    Ratings:
    +938
    A state passing a law concurring with a federal law but which is less stringent than the federal law does not usurp the federal law. States have always been enabled to enforce federal law because, one supposes, there are often not enough federal law enforcers.

    A reliance by a state's citizens on a law and then a lack of enforcement by the Feds would have the effect of denying equal justice for the citizens of the state if a need for the enforcement of that or any law (robbery of a federal bank for instance) is not fulfilled by the Feds resulting in harm to the citizens because of that lack of enforcement.

    In the Arizona case, the conditions of its application were purposely made more observant of citizens rights than the fedral version of the corresponding law. The reason for that difference was to avoid perceptions that the state was usurping federal prequisites. Arguments against it on constitutional grounds along with failure to enforce shows an intent to preclude any enforcement of immigration law.

    If it was common knowledge that bank robbers were not pursued by the FBI in a particular state, that lack of "pursuit" would create a magnetic effect therein, for robbers of federal banks with the resultant harm to the state's citizens, creating for them a state of inequality under the law. This is essentially what has happened in Arizona.
     
    Last edited: May 26, 2010
  6. Cecilie1200
    Offline

    Cecilie1200 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2008
    Messages:
    26,879
    Thanks Received:
    3,720
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +7,052
    And besides, where is it written that just because there is a law against something federally, there can't ALSO be state laws against it? It's not like it's a jurisdictional conflict, since Arizona hasn't suggested setting up its own ICE to process and deport people. Our law enforcement officers have been arresting illegals and turning them over to Immigration for a long time. The only difference is that NOW they're allowed to look a little more closely at people to find out if they're illegal.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  7. rdean
    Offline

    rdean rddean

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    Messages:
    60,075
    Thanks Received:
    6,886
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    chicago
    Ratings:
    +14,919
    So much confidence. So little intellect. How do you do it? Never mind. It was a rhetorical question.
     
  8. Dante
    Offline

    Dante On leave Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    52,463
    Thanks Received:
    3,324
    Trophy Points:
    1,825
    Location:
    On leave
    Ratings:
    +6,054
    AZ has decided to make the local police their own ICE. don't you get it?


    that is NOT the only difference. why are people like you so eager to give up freedoms?
     
  9. Dante
    Offline

    Dante On leave Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    52,463
    Thanks Received:
    3,324
    Trophy Points:
    1,825
    Location:
    On leave
    Ratings:
    +6,054
    bravo. :clap2: bravo :clap2: bravo
     
  10. Dante
    Offline

    Dante On leave Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    52,463
    Thanks Received:
    3,324
    Trophy Points:
    1,825
    Location:
    On leave
    Ratings:
    +6,054
    Your analogies are weird.
     

Share This Page