What Does This Mean To You?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by WillowTree, Apr 3, 2010.

  1. WillowTree
    Offline

    WillowTree Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    68,121
    Thanks Received:
    10,159
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +14,669
    In Graham v. Richardson, 403 U.S. 365, 372 (1971), the U.S. Supreme Court held that classifications by a State that are based on alienage are "inherently suspect and subject to close judicial scrutiny."

    The Court held that a State may not withhold welfare benefits from resident aliens "merely because of their alienage." Id. at 378. Such discrimination, the Court concluded, would not only violate the Equal Protection Clause, but would also encroach upon federal authority over lawfully admitted aliens. In support of the latter conclusion, the Court noted that Congress had "not seen fit to impose any burden or restriction on aliens who become indigent after their entry into the United States," id. at 377, but rather had chosen to afford "lawfully admitted resident aliens ... the full and equal benefit of all state laws for the security of persons and property," id. at 378. The States had thus imposed an "auxiliary [burden] upon the entrance or residence of aliens" that was never contemplated by Congress. Id. at 379.


    http://www.conservapedia.com/Graham_v._Richardson


    :confused:
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Apr 3, 2010
  2. Luissa
    Offline

    Luissa Annoying Customer Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2008
    Messages:
    43,190
    Thanks Received:
    5,593
    Trophy Points:
    1,785
    Location:
    TARDIS
    Ratings:
    +5,664
    Nothing.
    But I do take care of a lady who recieves SS and assistance from the state as a legal alien. Of course she worked in the US for over 30 years. Everything isn't black and white, Willow.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. SFC Ollie
    Offline

    SFC Ollie Still Marching

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Messages:
    28,742
    Thanks Received:
    4,418
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    Extreme East Ohio
    Ratings:
    +4,457
    I don't speak lawyerese very well, but it seems to say that the individual states cannot discriminate against legal aliens.
     
  4. Wry Catcher
    Offline

    Wry Catcher Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    31,737
    Thanks Received:
    4,239
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Ratings:
    +8,147
    What is your point (be honest now)?
     
  5. WillowTree
    Offline

    WillowTree Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    68,121
    Thanks Received:
    10,159
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +14,669
    you are as retarded as arty farty, where did I mention anything? I asked what does this mean to you.
     
  6. WillowTree
    Offline

    WillowTree Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    68,121
    Thanks Received:
    10,159
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +14,669
    a court is discussing the issue on c span. I just wondered what your take on it was.. you libruls freaking nutz.
     
  7. WillowTree
    Offline

    WillowTree Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    68,121
    Thanks Received:
    10,159
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +14,669
    http://www.constitutioncenter.org/Files/pjpmootcourt2010.pdf



    When a massive, global outbreak of a deadly form of “Simian” flu hits the United States in the summer of 2020, a shortfall of vaccine puts the country in a panic, compelling Congress to pass a law giving priority to individuals at risk without reference to citizenship. The Arizona state legislature interprets this silence as a grant to impose its own citizenship-based priority scheme, restricting access to vaccines for non-citizens. A group—consisting of non-citizen pregnant women, parents with young children, and resident aliens—brings a class action lawsuit challenging the law. This hypothetical Supreme Court case testing the constitutionality of rationing health care will be argued by distinguished legal scholars Nina Pillard, Professor of Law at Georgetown Law, and Kenneth W. Starr, Dean of the Pepperdine University School
     
  8. Wry Catcher
    Offline

    Wry Catcher Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    31,737
    Thanks Received:
    4,239
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Ratings:
    +8,147
    I'm not retarded, and you're not very bright. You copied and pasted something, what is your point?
     
  9. NYcarbineer
    Offline

    NYcarbineer Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    95,791
    Thanks Received:
    11,241
    Trophy Points:
    2,060
    Location:
    Finger Lakes, NY
    Ratings:
    +30,125
    What does it mean to me?

    Hmmm...to me it means that someone doesn't know there's a subforum for legal issues.
     
  10. WillowTree
    Offline

    WillowTree Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    68,121
    Thanks Received:
    10,159
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +14,669
    fuck you!
     

Share This Page