Judge blocks parts of Arizona immigration law

[Zona]

Yurt also said he was a lawyer then said he wasn't. That said righty faux outrage that was silent as a pin drop under bush is ******* hilarious.

Does anyone have a link to Yurt actaully admitting he wasnt a lawyer? That would be fantastic.

This guy is as bad as Conhog.

 

[WillowTree]

All I have to say is this.

To Those Opposed to this law. Do not get all excited, this was one Judge, Appointed by a democrat, Arizona will no doubt appeal. I suspect this was always destined for the Supreme court.

I would also not be to excited as a Democrat, and Obama supporter as with over 70% of people in favor of this law, this might be a legal victory, but it could be a political defeat.


To supporters of this law, I say. What, did you expect anything less from a Liberal Democrat Appointee? Don't let it get you down, there will be an appeal, and this is going to cost the Dems more votes. They just thumbed their noses at 77% of the American people, and are admittedly celebrating doing it. Obama won a victory for the Status Quo, DOING NOTHING. This will not play well for him with Independents at all.

Nuff said, I await the Appeal.

his polls are already down to 43& can't wait to see what they hit now.. it will be funny as hell..

 

[topspin]

I think he fessed up on jpp.

 

[topspin]

Yurt is cool, he just takes himself way to serious. He might be in law school about to graduate.

 

[Yurt]

By the way 1070 supporters and racist assholes .....neener neener. I told you this thing wouldn't go through and if it does, it will bankrupt this state.

hey half nickel brain....see post 89 if you want to actually discuss issues and not jizz your spam all over the place

Half nickel brain?

Who said ..."obama's daughters are whores" 7/16/10 Yurt.

A half nickel brain?

ah....still lying about context...you know full well i said that to make fun of dante and show that making fun of politicians families is stupid, especially calling them whores...but do continue half nickel brain....btw...other democrats on this site repped me because of your lies about what i said....you're not fooling anyone and you and truthmattesr are the only hacks trying to peddle that bullshit

 

[Wicked Jester]

I hate to say this, but for once Chris Mathews of MSNBC gets it right.

Basically he stated that this ruling is a complete disaster for the dem's. It plays into the hands of the Tea Party movement and conservatives in general whose message is that government is getting way too big and powerful for its own good. They are doing everything they can to meddle in states affairs. Obama picked this fight. He once a again picked a fight that goes against what the majority of americans believe. In this case, The majority support the Arizona law, and want federal laws enforced just the same. The support for the law is coming from 3 sides of the aisle. Repubs, moderate/conservative dems, and independents. The polls don't lie.

Obama's mouth, ego, and abject liberalism are writing checks his falling popularity can't cash.

At least there is SOMEBODY in the MSM who isn't affraid to tell it like it is. I'm just shocked that it's ol' "thrill up the leg" Mathews.


Novembers going to be beyond interesting.

 

[WillowTree]

I hate to say this, but for once Chris Mathews of MSNBC gets it right.

Basically he stated that this ruling is a complete disaster for the dem's. It plays into the hands of the Tea Party movement and conservatives in general whose message is that government is getting way to big and powerful for its own good. They are doing everything they can to meddle in states affairs. Obama picked this fight. He once a again picked a fight that goes against what the majority of americans believe. In this case, The majority support the Arizona law, and want federal laws enforced just the same. The support for the law is coming from 3 sides of the aisle. Repubs, moderate/conservative dems, and independents. The polls don't lie.

Obama's mouth, ego, and abject liberalism are writing checks his falling popularity can't cash.


Novembers going to be beyond interesting.

he's freaking the hell out innhe?

 

[Tank]

By the way 1070 supporters and racist assholes .....neener neener. I told you this thing wouldn't go through and if it does, it will bankrupt this state.

You call other racist as you rejoice that illegal alians are still advailable to be exploited for there cheap labor.

 

[Ravi]

I'll leave someone else you second point, but as to the first, you are clearly incorrect.

The AZ law is not federal law. The AZ law mirrors the federal law in its requirements, but it is a state law, that's why we're referring to it as the Arizona law, not the federal law.

But, even if it were federal law, local law enforcement can enforce federal law with the proper training. Here in Prince William county we've been doing it for 3 years now. Not one single substantiated case of racial profiling. If someone is arrested, their immigration status is check. Period. End of story. If you are here illegally, we call the paddy wagon at ICE and haul your ass back to where you came from.

You're confused. There is a big difference between CAN and HAVE TO. The injunction is against the MANDATING of the local officers enforcing immigration law...state or federal. And I said federal because clearly a state has no jurisdiction over deciding US citizenship.

Your county's actions are different in that it is their choice as a county to do it...no one is mandating they do it except the perhaps the citizens of the county.

The police in this county are MANDATED to determine immigration status of those arrested. Sorry I used the permissive in my response, I didn't realize that was your point. Likewise, under the AZ law, AZ police officers would be mandated to determine status after making a stop for another crime or traffic infraction.

By who? The only ones that can mandate them, as far as I can tell, are the city leaders.

And also, with those arrested...I have no trouble with that.

Edit: well, I actually have a little trouble with those that are arrested, but not with those that are convicted.

 

[Yurt]

I'm gonna pass on yurt the fake lawyers call on this. Obama needed this he had two straight losses in court vs oil.

care to explain why....other than obama needed a win

perhaps you could actually debate instead of obsessively focusing on what people may or may not do for a living....

put the bong down for a second leafy and try to rationally discuss this

 

[Yurt]

Yurt is cool, he just takes himself way to serious. He might be in law school about to graduate.

nope...i'm a clean, articulate person with a slight indian accent who works at 7/11

 

[Ravi]

The ruling may be temporary, but it's still baseless. There is NO chance of any irreparable harm had the judge not approved the temporary restraining order. Indeed, it is fantasy to claim that there is a likelihood that opponents of the legislation will ultimately prevail.

The ruling was a spineless and gutless abrogation of her actual judicial responsibility.

Let's not kid ourselves. The liberal bias of the judicial branch is quite clear and this is a political question that is being treated (invalidly) as though it were properly justiciable. In her eventual (final) ruling she, like the Higher Courts (with the possible exception of the SCOTUS) are likely going to rule by judicial fiat along the very same lines.

What possible legal justification can exist to prevent a cop from finding out if some illegal immigrant is an illegal immigrant?

It really is insane. Libs and other kooks have clearly taken over the asylum.

Why should local police officers be mandated to enforce federal immigration law? And why should everyone be forced to carry identification?

Those two things clearly run up against the constitution.

Wrong. they don't "clearly" run up the Constitution. They don't run up against the constitution at all.

Local Law enforcement is mandated by the laws of their respective states to do lots of things. Why the **** should a state not have the authority and power to direct the cops to check the immigration status of suspected illegal aliens when they have been stopped for other reasons?

And nobody is required by the AZ law to carry I.D. That's an invalid attempt to score a cheap debate point. If you happen to come under suspicion after a traffic stop etc., but you also happen to be here legally (or, perhaps, you are a by-God citizen), you may get verbally challenged. Your answers may suffice to assist you, but perhaps not. Ooops. You might get detained until you are cleared. Gee. That's oh so sucky.

But just think about it. That minor inconvenience weighed against isolating and identifying someone here illegally COULD turn out to be a life saver. There are some "bad guys" out there trying to get in for nefarious purposes. It would be wonderful if this program happens to intercept an al qaeda piece of shit.

You guys get your panties in a wad like WAY too easily.

You're wrong on all points. But this part I've bolded...that is why so many are willing to give up so much: fear. Laws written to harass the innocent are stupid laws.

 

[Againsheila]

Boltondelayed provisions that required immigrants to carry their papers

There is already a federal law that requires immigrants to carry their papers, is she gonna block that one too?

 

[topspin]

Oh if you can tell me where the outrage was during bush's time. Seems to me bush spent more time learning Spanish than deporting anyone. I want depotation more than you wingnuts, but I do find faux outrage hillarious.

 

[topspin]

Also calling it pollitics when a judge goes agaist you and a good ruling when they are with you is fabulously hacktastick.

 

[SFC Ollie]

I don't know anyone who was in favor of amnesty when bush was talking about it either. Besides Bush is history; we learn from that. At least some of us do.

 

[Againsheila]

AZ discriminates against legal citizens plain and simple.

Why should any legal citizen show any ID? If I were in AZ I'd enter a Federal building, refuse to show papers then sue for discrimination.

Goose meet gander

When I went into the courthouse in Kent, they never asked me for ID, until I got to the person who I was there to pay my fine for being caught driving without proof of insurance.

Why have ID if we don't have to show it?

 

[Wicked Jester]

Boltondelayed provisions that required immigrants to carry their papers

There is already a federal law that requires immigrants to carry their papers, is she gonna block that one too?

Excellent point. What is going to happen is that it will go to the loons in the 9th circuit. They will no doubt uphold Boltons ruling, being the good lil' far lefties they are. It will then make it to the SCOTUS, and as they have done 75% of the time throughout the years, they will reverse the 9th circuit, and Arizona will be on their way to doing the right thing!

This is a political disaster for Obama and the dem's. Wait and see!

 

[Yurt]

hey ravi.....too scared to address post 98 and 102?

apparently when you are asked to substantiate your claims, you conveniently don't see those posts....

must be nice to make claims without ever having to bother supporting them

 

[Againsheila]

Boltondelayed provisions that required immigrants to carry their papers

There is already a federal law that requires immigrants to carry their papers, is she gonna block that one too?

Excellent point. What is going to happen is that it will go to the loons in the 9th circuit. They will no doubt uphold Boltons ruling, being the good lil' far lefties they are. It will then make it to the SCOTUS, and as they have done 75% of the time throughout the years, they will reverse the 9th circuit, and Arizona will be on their way to doing the right thing!

This is a political disaster for Obama and the dem's. Wait and see!

The supreme court gets to pick and choose what cases they hear, they sure as heck aren't gonna hear this one.