Illinois law allowing non-citizen police may violate 14th Amendment

[pknopp]

You can go to the link, there should be a statement near the bottom of the page that says something to the effect of "if you found errors in this story... to contact them & they will retract the error".

You assume I care enough to do that.

But as typical, you make it about me as opposed to the lousy journalism.

 

[SamInAZ]

You assume I care enough to do that.

But as typical, you make it about me as opposed to the lousy journalism.

I'm not making it about you...I am saying if you doubt what they said about federal law, correct them. You don't want disinformation to be spread, do you?

 

[pknopp]

I'm not making it about you...I am saying if you doubt what they said about federal law, correct them. You don't want disinformation to be spread, do you?

You assume I care enough. Journalism is no longer what it once was. I'm not going to be able to change that.

 

[SamInAZ]

You assume I care enough. Journalism is no longer what it once was. I'm not going to be able to change that.

I don't disagree with you on the state of journalism. But attempting to correct a false claim from a news source takes about as much time as commenting on the topic here. I would guess that it has already been attempted & failed a few times or it wouldn't still be in the report.

 

[pknopp]

I don't disagree with you on the state of journalism. But attempting to correct a false claim from a news source takes about as much time as commenting on the topic here. I would guess that it has already been attempted & failed a few times or it wouldn't still be in the report.

First I didn't say it was a false claim. I said there was nothing to verify the claim nor has anyone else.

Verify the claim.

 

[johnwk]

Non-citizens here legally are under the jurisdiction of the federal government, they are not citizens of any state they happen to live or work in or of the United States ...therefore they are not legally allowed to be in positions of law enforcement in any state. If you are not a citizen, you have zero standing to become cops or deputies.
This will go to the supreme court & will be tossed out.

Watch.

The only problem I see is, those who ought to be taking this to court like the PBA, seem to be spinless in defending the citizenship requirement for the state created, privileged occupation of being a police officer.

JWK

“In short, it would be as anomalous to conclude that citizens may be subjected to the broad discretionary powers of noncitizen police officers as it would be to say that judicial officers and jurors with power to judge citizens can be aliens.”
___ Foley v Connelie, 435 U.S. 291 (1978)

 

[SamInAZ]

The only problem I see is, those who ought to be taking this to court like the PBA, seem to be spinless in defending the citizenship requirement for the state created, privileged occupation of being a police officer.

JWK

“In short, it would be as anomalous to conclude that citizens may be subjected to the broad discretionary powers of noncitizen police officers as it would be to say that judicial officers and jurors with power to judge citizens can be aliens.”
___ Foley v Connelie, 435 U.S. 291 (1978)

They aren't allowed to be cops. Period. This is just woketard states overstepping their boundaries knowing it will take time before their overstepping can be addressed by the supreme court.

 

[Curried Goats]

My thinking is based on what the United States Supreme Court ruled in Foley v Connelie, 435 U.S. 291 (1978)

Chief Justice Burger, who delivered the majority opinion in Foley v Connelie, substantiates beyond any reasonable question why “. . . citizenship may be a relevant qualification . . . ,‘ in fulfilling "important nonelective executive, legislative, and judicial positions . . . " in our democratic system.

As one can see, Justice Burger goes on to point out:

“This is not because our society seeks to reserve the better jobs to its members. Rather, it is because this country entrusts many of its most important policy responsibilities to these officers, the discretionary exercise of which can often more immediately affect the lives of citizens than even the ballot of a voter or the choice of a legislator. In sum, then, it represents the choice, and right, of the people to be governed by their citizen peers.”

Although the question of being hired by the state as a police officer falls within the category of a privileged occupation, it was not a primary issue in Foley. But Burger’s fierce defense for New York excluding foreign nationals from being hired as police officers is a good indication if the question had been raised and litigated, he would have concluded such employment by the State does fall within a State’s created privileged occupations. As Justice Burger wrote:

“Clearly the exercise of police authority calls for a very high degree of judgment and discretion, the abuse or misuse of which can have serious impact on individuals. 7 The office of a policeman is in no sense one of “the common occupations of the community” that the then Mr. Justice Hughes referred to in Truax v. Raich, 239 U.S. 33, 41 (1915). A policeman vested with the plenary discretionary powers we have described is not to be equated with a private person engaged in routine public employment or other “common occupations of the community” who exercises no broad power over people generally. [435 U.S. 291, 299] Indeed, the rationale for the qualified immunity historically granted to the police rests on the difficult and delicate judgments these officers must often make.”

The only remaining question is, does extending that privileged type of state employment to non-citizens, abridge a federally protected privilege of Citizens under the Fourteenth Amendment (“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.”) who are actively pursuing that type of employment?

It seems to be a self-evident fact that, for every non-citizen hired by the State of Illinois as a police officer, there is one less employment opportunity for the citizens of Illinois to be hired as a police officer, thereby creating an abridgment of a state created privileged occupation for Illinois’ citizens.

Now, instead of obfuscating, instagating and deflecting, how about addressing what Justice Burger stated above?


JWK

“There is no greater privilege than serving the people of New York City, and that privilege comes with a responsibility to keep yourself and your community safe," Mayor Bill de Blasio LINK

This law is already in effect in California you Dipshit. Wake me when the Supreme Court rules it unconstitutional.

 

[johnwk]

They aren't allowed to be cops. Period. This is just woketard states overstepping their boundaries knowing it will take time before their overstepping can be addressed by the supreme court.

I wonder what the motive is behind putting foreign nationals in charge of policing American citizens.

The only thing which comes to my mind is what the Chinese Communist Party did in 1989.

I imagine many here do not recall the Tiananmen Square Massacre of 1989 in which the Communist Chinese Party decided to end a student led demonstration for democracy.

The CCP brought in a couple of divisions of the People’s Liberation Army from remote provinces to end the demonstrations for democracy, and they did so because the CCP anticipated local divisions of the army would not fire upon the protestors and could actually be supporters of the uprising.

It’s absolutely mind numbing that a United States Governor would embrace arming non-citizens and allow them to police and arrest American citizens.

JWK

“If aliens might be admitted indiscriminately to enjoy all the rights of citizens at the will of a single state, the Union might itself be endangered by an influx of foreigners, hostile to its institutions, ignorant of its powers, and incapable of a due estimate of its privileges." - ___ Justice Story

 

[SamInAZ]

This law is already in effect in California you Dipshit. Wake me when the Supreme Court rules it unconstitutional.

You are too retarded to talk to. Believe what you want. I don't want to waste any more time on your mind-numbing stupidity.

 

[Curried Goats]

You are too retarded to talk to. Believe what you want. I don't want to waste any more time on your mind-numbing stupidity.

You mean I should believe that measures that are passed by legislative bodies are legally legitimate until ruled otherwise by the Supreme Court? Why I don't mind if I do.

 

[SamInAZ]

You mean I should believe that measures that are passed by legislative bodies are legally legitimate until ruled otherwise by the Supreme Court? Why I don't mind if I do.

You just proved you are an ass...Mr. Assume. Lmao!

 

[Curried Goats]

You just proved you are an ass...Mr. Assume. Lmao!

That's not an assumption you Bingo. Thats just how law and government work.

 

[SamInAZ]

That's not an assumption you Bingo. Thats just how law and government work.

No it isn't, dipshit. Why are you so dumb?

 

[Curried Goats]

No it isn't, dipshit. Why are you so dumb?

Sure. Laws passed by State legislators aren't actually laws. I encourage you to operate under this assumption.

 

[johnwk]

Sure. Laws passed by State legislators aren't actually laws. I encourage you to operate under this assumption.

"The Constitution is the act of the people, speaking in their original character, and defining the permanent conditions of the social alliance; and there can be no doubt on the point with us, that every act of the legislative power contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution, is absolutely null and void. ___ Chancellor James Kent, in his Commentaries on American Law , 1858.

 

[SamInAZ]

Sure. Laws passed by State legislators aren't actually laws. I encourage you to operate under this assumption.

Sure. Laws passed by State legislators have never been deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court shortly afterwards. You mental midget....lol

 

[Curried Goats]

"The Constitution is the act of the people, speaking in their original character, and defining the permanent conditions of the social alliance; and there can be no doubt on the point with us, that every act of the legislative power contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution, is absolutely null and void. ___ Chancellor James Kent, in his Commentaries on American Law , 1858.

That's some assholes opinion in 1858. You know what was legal back in 1858? Chattel slavery. Maybe try someone's opinion from this century you fucking mope.

 

[SamInAZ]

That's some assholes opinion in 1858. You know what was legal back in 1858? Chattel slavery. Maybe try someone's opinion from this century you fucking mope.

Worst mistake this country ever made was allowing slavery. And not just because slavery is evil.

 

[johnwk]

That's some assholes opinion in 1858. You know what was legal back in 1858? Chattel slavery. Maybe try someone's opinion from this century you fucking mope.

The Democrat Party Leadership has been angry, stupid and obnoxious ever since the Republican Party Leadership freed democrat owned slaves and put the KKK out of business.