Will America Adopt AZs New Immigration Law?

[froggy]

Illegal Immigration and Arizona Law: Illegal Immigration and state legislation: pending legislation: illegal aliens: Alabama: Arizona: Idaho: Maryland: Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Oklahoma: Pennsylvania: South Carolina: Texas: Utah: - Chicago Poli

 

[Wicked Jester]

Illegal Immigration and Arizona Law: Illegal Immigration and state legislation: pending legislation: illegal aliens: Alabama: Arizona: Idaho: Maryland: Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Oklahoma: Pennsylvania: South Carolina: Texas: Utah: - Chicago Poli

The sad thing is, america had the law loooooong before Arizona came up with it.

Sadly, we have leadership who do not have the guts to enforce it!

But seeing as though the majority of americans support that law, leadership may be forced to start implementing it. Otherwise, they won't be leading jack shit!

 

[Zander]

I think we'll see more states follow AZ's lead. We simply cannot ignore the problem.

 

[VaYank5150]

Washington....Republican, Democrat or Independent will do NOTHING on this issue until at least after the mid-terms. If anyone is still questioning what is wrong with our Government, look no further than this.

 

[boedicca]

Correction:

What DC will do is threaten to withhold Federal Funding to such states for the morass of Federal mandated programs forced on the states in order to blackmail them into giving up on enforcing immigration laws.

 

[VaYank5150]

Correction:

What DC will do is threaten to withhold Federal Funding to such states for the morass of Federal mandated programs forced on the states in order to blackmail them into giving up on enforcing immigration laws.

Got proof? Has this already been stated by the WH? Obama has already stepped in doo-doo on this one. I can't believe he would go even farther.

 

[amrchaos]

Don't you mean "will the American states adopt the Federal regulations as state law"?

The way I am hearing it, Arizona just became an arm to the Federal government on matters of immigration.

And to that little girl with the undocumented mommy--Moms going back! She knew trespassing was illegal! Mommy should be thankful that we do not shoot border jumpers--now tell your mommy to jump back over!!

 

[LuckyDan]

I doubt it. We seem far closer to doing away with the idea of a border altogether than enforcing immigration law.

 

[boedicca]

Correction:

What DC will do is threaten to withhold Federal Funding to such states for the morass of Federal mandated programs forced on the states in order to blackmail them into giving up on enforcing immigration laws.

Got proof? Has this already been stated by the WH? Obama has already stepped in doo-doo on this one. I can't believe he would go even farther.

We'll see what happens. Look at how more Stimulus funds were handed out to states which voted for Obama as opposed to the ones that went for McCain.

The political process provides numerous opportunities for soft threats to be applied. There is no way Obama is going to hold a press conference (remember, he avoid those these days) to announce how the blackmail will be applied. But watch where there money flows. That will tell the story.

 

[Flopper]

Illegal Immigration and Arizona Law: Illegal Immigration and state legislation: pending legislation: illegal aliens: Alabama: Arizona: Idaho: Maryland: Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Oklahoma: Pennsylvania: South Carolina: Texas: Utah: - Chicago Poli

I don't see any difference between the current federal immigration law and the Arizona law except the feds don't enforce the law.

In the proposed legislation, the path to citizenship for illegal aliens, the national id card, and punishment for those who hire illegals will meet with opposition from both sides. These are all practical methods to solve the problem, however unpopular they may be.

The new immigration law is unlikely to pass before the midterm elections. Considering the polarization we are seeing now, I suspect that the Obama immigration legislation will go the route of the Bush immigration legislation.

 

[VaYank5150]

Correction:

What DC will do is threaten to withhold Federal Funding to such states for the morass of Federal mandated programs forced on the states in order to blackmail them into giving up on enforcing immigration laws.

Got proof? Has this already been stated by the WH? Obama has already stepped in doo-doo on this one. I can't believe he would go even farther.

We'll see what happens. Look at how more Stimulus funds were handed out to states which voted for Obama as opposed to the ones that went for McCain.

The political process provides numerous opportunities for soft threats to be applied. There is no way Obama is going to hold a press conference (remember, he avoid those these days) to announce how the blackmail will be applied. But watch where there money flows. That will tell the story.

Thanks for the clarification. I just wanted to make sure I didn't miss something, and that you were just making another one of your partisan assumptions.

 

[Foxfyre]

Illegal Immigration and Arizona Law: Illegal Immigration and state legislation: pending legislation: illegal aliens: Alabama: Arizona: Idaho: Maryland: Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Oklahoma: Pennsylvania: South Carolina: Texas: Utah: - Chicago Poli

I sure hope so. State governments, with the possible exception of those few who are little countries unto themselves like New York and California, tend to be more responsive to the will (and anger) of the people; and in most places in the country, the people want the immigration laws enforced.

If enough states get on board and SCOTUS is smart enough to realize that the possibility of abuse does not constitute any infringement on anybody's rights, the Federal government will be powerless to have much clout to punish those states.

Of course a thoroughly arrogant and non responsive Congress with a willing President could pass some sort of law taking it away from the states entirely. But as arrogant and non responsive as our present Congress and President have been, I don't think they would be brave enough to do that.

 

[Flopper]

Washington....Republican, Democrat or Independent will do NOTHING on this issue until at least after the mid-terms. If anyone is still questioning what is wrong with our Government, look no further than this.

It's all to easy to blame government and political parties for our problems, however they are only reflections of ourselves. As the country becomes more divided, Congress will become more divided. Laws reflect more idealogical than practicality. Legislation passes or fails, not because of quality, but rather who sponsored the bill. Government becomes more inefficient as it tries to implement poor legislation that does not deal with the problem because the solutions are politically unpopular.

The answers to our problems do not lie with either the left or the right, but the middle which is shrinking very fast.

 

[froggy]

I doubt it. We seem far closer to doing away with the idea of a border altogether than enforcing immigration law.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jg0pDPK56Ys]YouTube - Michael Savage- Stupidest Caller Ever- Welfare Money From Obama Stash, Illegal Aliens; Open Borders![/ame]

 

[boedicca]

Got proof? Has this already been stated by the WH? Obama has already stepped in doo-doo on this one. I can't believe he would go even farther.

We'll see what happens. Look at how more Stimulus funds were handed out to states which voted for Obama as opposed to the ones that went for McCain.

The political process provides numerous opportunities for soft threats to be applied. There is no way Obama is going to hold a press conference (remember, he avoid those these days) to announce how the blackmail will be applied. But watch where there money flows. That will tell the story.

Thanks for the clarification. I just wanted to make sure I didn't miss something, and that you were just making another one of your partisan assumptions.

Well, it's pretty clear you have your head stuffed up too far into whatever crotch is in your current Av to pay attention to how DC is using the financial crisis to consolidate more power at the Federal level.

 

[VaYank5150]

We'll see what happens. Look at how more Stimulus funds were handed out to states which voted for Obama as opposed to the ones that went for McCain.

The political process provides numerous opportunities for soft threats to be applied. There is no way Obama is going to hold a press conference (remember, he avoid those these days) to announce how the blackmail will be applied. But watch where there money flows. That will tell the story.

Thanks for the clarification. I just wanted to make sure I didn't miss something, and that you were just making another one of your partisan assumptions.

Well, it's pretty clear you have your head stuffed up too far into whatever crotch is in your current Av to pay attention to how DC is using the financial crisis to consolidate more power at the Federal level.

IF I did....do you REALLY think I would be on a message board discussing politics with hacks like you? Rather than seeing things as they are presented, you seem them in your own "consolidation of power" way. NO ONE will ever change your little mind on this, so why do you even bother to discuss it? Are you a paid GOP hack?

 

[Flopper]

Illegal Immigration and Arizona Law: Illegal Immigration and state legislation: pending legislation: illegal aliens: Alabama: Arizona: Idaho: Maryland: Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Oklahoma: Pennsylvania: South Carolina: Texas: Utah: - Chicago Poli

I sure hope so. State governments, with the possible exception of those few who are little countries unto themselves like New York and California, tend to be more responsive to the will (and anger) of the people; and in most places in the country, the people want the immigration laws enforced.

If enough states get on board and SCOTUS is smart enough to realize that the possibility of abuse does not constitute any infringement on anybody's rights, the Federal government will be powerless to have much clout to punish those states.

Of course a thoroughly arrogant and non responsive Congress with a willing President could pass some sort of law taking it away from the states entirely. But as arrogant and non responsive as our present Congress and President have been, I don't think they would be brave enough to do that.

Congress and the President will not take away the right of the states to pass immigration laws. The courts will since the states never had that right. The power to make naturalization law is a power reserved for the federal government in the Constitution. It's pretty unlikely that the Supreme Court would reverse earlier decisions and allow states to create their own immigration laws. I think the Arizona law will be shot down in a lower court.

This is all political nonsense designed to force the feds to enforce the law which is not going to happen unless Congress does something. Congress is not likely to do anything for a long long time with the political divisions between and with the parties on this issue.

 

[kyzr]

First we pass the State Laws, then we get a new ICE man who actually deport those here illegally.

I can't believe that SIEU and other unions would rather protest bankers than illegals who are the cause of their low wages. Dem pols have the weak minded dems so confused...illegals are our friends.....?!

 

[Foxfyre]

Illegal Immigration and Arizona Law: Illegal Immigration and state legislation: pending legislation: illegal aliens: Alabama: Arizona: Idaho: Maryland: Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Oklahoma: Pennsylvania: South Carolina: Texas: Utah: - Chicago Poli

I sure hope so. State governments, with the possible exception of those few who are little countries unto themselves like New York and California, tend to be more responsive to the will (and anger) of the people; and in most places in the country, the people want the immigration laws enforced.

If enough states get on board and SCOTUS is smart enough to realize that the possibility of abuse does not constitute any infringement on anybody's rights, the Federal government will be powerless to have much clout to punish those states.

Of course a thoroughly arrogant and non responsive Congress with a willing President could pass some sort of law taking it away from the states entirely. But as arrogant and non responsive as our present Congress and President have been, I don't think they would be brave enough to do that.

Congress and the President will not take away the right of the states to pass immigration laws. The courts will since the states never had that right. The power to make naturalization law is a power reserved for the federal government in the Constitution. It's pretty unlikely that the Supreme Court would reverse earlier decisions and allow states to create their own immigration laws. I think the Arizona law will be shot down in a lower court.

This is all political nonsense designed to force the feds to enforce the law which is not going to happen unless Congress does something. Congress is not likely to do anything for a long long time with the political divisions between and with the parties on this issue.

Arizona did not pass immigration laws. Arizona passed legislation allowing their law enforcement people to enforce Federal immigration laws. There is absolutely nothing in that legislation that does not exist in the Federal law

And that's what all these other states are considering. And from what I have been reading, there is all kinds of precedent giving local law enforcement authority to enforce federal law, most particularly the immigration laws:

In 1983, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit -- you read that right, the Ninth Circuit -- concluded, in Gonzales v. City of Peoria, 722 F.2d 468, that, “Although the regulation of immigration is unquestionably an exclusive federal power, it is clear that this power does not preempt every state activity affecting aliens.” Rather, when “state enforcement activities do not impair federal regulatory interests concurrent enforcement is authorized.” The Court accordingly held “that federal law does not preclude local enforcement of the criminal provisions” of federal immigration law.

In 1984, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit likewise ruled, in United States v. Salinas-Calderon, that “[a] state trooper has general investigatory authority to inquire into possible immigration violations.”

Fifteen years later, in 1999, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit reaffirmed its position, in United States v. Vasquez-Alvarez, 176 F.3rd 1294, stating, “this court has long held that state and local law enforcement officers are empowered to arrest for violations of federal law, as long as such arrest is authorized by state law.”

In 2001, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit ruled again, in United States v. Santana-Garcia, 264 F.3rd 1188, “that state law enforcement officers within the Tenth Circuit ‘have the general authority to investigate and make arrests for violations of federal immigration laws,’ and that federal law as currently written does nothing ‘to displace . . . state or local authority to arrest individuals violating federal immigration laws.’ On the contrary, the Court said, “federal law ‘evinces a clear invitation from Congress for state and local agencies to participate in the process of enforcing federal immigration laws.’”

In 2001, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held, in United States v. Rodriguez-Arreola, 270 F.3rd 611, that a state trooper did not violate the defendant’s rights by questioning him about his immigration status after pulling him over for speeding.

In 2002, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit held, in United States v. Favela-Favela, 41 Fed. Appx. 185, that a state trooper did not violate the defendant’s rights by asking questions about his immigration status, after pulling the defendant over for a traffic violation and noticing there were 20 people in the van the defendant was driving.

In 2005, the United States Supreme Court held, in Muehler v. Mena, 544 U.S. 93, that police officers who handcuffed a gang member while they executed a search warrant for weapons, did not violate her rights by questioning her about her immigration status. The Court explained, “[E]ven when officers have no basis for suspecting a particular individual, they may generally ask questions of that individual; ask to examine the individual's identification; and request consent to search his or her luggage."

In 2005, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit confirmed again, in United States v. Hernandez-Dominguez, 1 Fed. Appx. 827, that "[a] state trooper [who has executed a lawful stop] has general investigatory authority to inquire into possible immigration violations."

in 2008, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri held, in Gray v. City of Valley Park, 2008 U.S. Dist LEXIS 7238, affirmed 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 12075, that federal law did not preempt a local ordinance suspending the business license of any business that hires illegal aliens.

In 2008, the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey concluded, in Rojas v. City of New Brunswick, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57974, that, “As a general matter, state and local law enforcement officers are not precluded from enforcing federal statutes. Where state enforcement activities do not impair federal regulatory interests concurrent enforcement activity is authorized.” The Court accordingly held that a city and its police department had authority to investigate and arrest people for possible violations of federal immigration laws.

I can't imagine that the State of Arizona has such crappy legal counsel that they didn't look pretty thoroughly at what they could and could not do when they drafted that law.

 

[naomibee]

yes please lets do it!!!!