Sanctuary City Question Leaves Gibbs Stammering

[Lonestar_logic]

No, enforcing international borders isn't the exclusive province of the feds.

See: Dual sovereignty.

Dual sovereignty cannot apply to matters of law where the Constitution gives the federal government sole authority. This is the case with immigration.

The Constitution doesn't address immigration.

 

[saveliberty]

Where in the constitution does it say cities must enforce Federal immigration policy?

Where does it say there is social security, medicare or unemployment insurance?

 

[Ravi]

Where in the constitution does it say cities must enforce Federal immigration policy?

Where does it say there is social security, medicare or unemployment insurance?

So your comment about officials swearing to uphold the constitution was a non-sequitur. Got it.

 

[GHook93]

What a *****! Answer the ******* question. I watched Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs with my kids yesterday. In that move they had a thought analyser. If you would have put that on Gibbs (or Obama for that matter) it would have said. "Look we are attacking AZ simply because we want the latino vote, we can give damn about their concerns. We care only about their votes. If we sell out the country to placate the largest growing demographic, we so be it. Look ya little whore, the Democrats are getting their asses handed to them, 2010 elections are here, 2012 is around the corner, we have the uneducated Black Vote, because of our black president, if sell out the country on the illegal immigration issue, we can secure the Latino vote and have a fighting chance in both 2010 and 2012!"

Sanctuary City Question Leaves Gibbs Stammering , page 1


This is to funny. I told you Obama had opened up a can of worms he didn't want opened by suing over his law.

It is a very logical and legitimate question.

If Arizona can not pass a law that mimics Federal Immigration law, because of Federal Supremacy on the issue of Border control and immigration. Then why is the Obama Admin not suing every Sanctuary City. All who have passed laws in direct conflict with standing Federal Immigration law.

Gotta love Gibbs non answer.

I can't wait to here the excused the dream up for this one.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Sanctuary City Question Leaves Gibbs Stammering , page 1


This is to funny. I told you Obama had opened up a can of worms he didn't want opened by suing over his law.

It is a very logical and legitimate question.

If Arizona can not pass a law that mimics Federal Immigration law, because of Federal Supremacy on the issue of Border control and immigration. Then why is the Obama Admin not suing every Sanctuary City. All who have passed laws in direct conflict with standing Federal Immigration law.

Gotta love Gibbs non answer.

I can't wait to here the excused the dream up for this one.

Another excellent point. I'm surprised a reporter asked a real question...kudos to that lone wolf of a true journalist right there.

 

[Meister]

Where in the constitution does it say cities must enforce Federal immigration policy?

Where does it say there is social security, medicare or unemployment insurance?

Don't forget Healthcare

 

[saveliberty]

Where in the constitution does it say cities must enforce Federal immigration policy?

Where does it say there is social security, medicare or unemployment insurance?

So your comment about officials swearing to uphold the constitution was a non-sequitur. Got it.

I did not say that. It is found in indirect places like repelling enemies that are domestic. By the by, yours was non-sequitur as well. That is why I did the same.

 

[Ravi]

States aren't required to enforce Federal immigration policy. States aren't free to enact laws that allow them to arrest people for violating federal immigration policy.

Not sure where the confusion lies...but obviously many of you are confused.

 

[Big Fitz]

What a *****! Answer the ******* question. I watched Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs with my kids yesterday. In that move they had a thought analyser. If you would have put that on Gibbs (or Obama for that matter) it would have said. "Look we are attacking AZ simply because we want the latino vote, we can give damn about their concerns. We care only about their votes. If we sell out the country to placate the largest growing demographic, we so be it. Look ya little whore, the Democrats are getting their asses handed to them, 2010 elections are here, 2012 is around the corner, we have the uneducated Black Vote, because of our black president, if sell out the country on the illegal immigration issue, we can secure the Latino vote and have a fighting chance in both 2010 and 2012!"

Sanctuary City Question Leaves Gibbs Stammering , page 1


This is to funny. I told you Obama had opened up a can of worms he didn't want opened by suing over his law.

It is a very logical and legitimate question.

If Arizona can not pass a law that mimics Federal Immigration law, because of Federal Supremacy on the issue of Border control and immigration. Then why is the Obama Admin not suing every Sanctuary City. All who have passed laws in direct conflict with standing Federal Immigration law.

Gotta love Gibbs non answer.

I can't wait to here the excused the dream up for this one.

They care about the votes only in as much they can rule without the pesky annoyance of elections and democratic process and reassert their 'noble right' over the rest.

 

[peach174]

It's terrible that this has become a race issue & about law, when in fact it's a drug cartel issue who has taken over a part of the United State's !!!!!
They have taken over that part of AZ. because hwy. 8 goes right to San Diego and drugs can then be distributed thoughout the U.S.!

 

[saveliberty]

States aren't required to enforce Federal immigration policy. States aren't free to enact laws that allow them to arrest people for violating federal immigration policy.

Not sure where the confusion lies...but obviously many of you are confused.

Mirror, Ravi. Ravi, mirror.

 

[fyrenza]

also while you are right Arizona law does try to regulate immigration. It does so by mimic Federal law. Which there is Legal precedent already telling us is ok.

No, there is not a legal precedent saying that. You just made that one up. And no, Arizona's law does not mimic federal law. Anyone who says that has not read the law itself.

Guess AP didn't bother to read the laws before THEY commented?

Arizona's new law is nearly identical to federal immigration law. At issue is how it is enforced. The federal government says the state law is unconstitutional because it usurps federal authority to protect U.S. borders and American citizens. Arizona counters that the federal government is not doing its job, which forces state officials to step in.

Full article: Immigration Enforcement Lawsuit

 

[rightwinger]

I watched that and peed all over myself what an idiot.

I bet its not the first time.....or the last

 

[saveliberty]

I watched that and peed all over myself what an idiot.

I bet its not the first time.....or the last

Got that right. There are tons of idiot liberals all over the place. It is just a matter of time.

 

[Ravi]

I watched that and peed all over myself what an idiot.

I bet its not the first time.....or the last

Depends.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

It's terrible that this has become a race issue & about law, when in fact it's a drug cartel issue who has taken over a part of the United State's !!!!!
They have taken over that part of AZ. because hwy. 8 goes right to San Diego and drugs can then be distributed thoughout the U.S.!

The DOJ's case against arizona does NOT mention race.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I watched that and peed all over myself what an idiot.

I bet its not the first time.....or the last

Depends.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Where in the constitution does it say cities must enforce Federal immigration policy?

The same place where it says cities must enforce federal housing policies, and federal civil rights policies.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Where in the constitution does it say cities must enforce Federal immigration policy?

I like this line of thought.

Using this logic the states don't have to enforce federal law. I really like this ravi now your thinking like states rights people, Kudos girl!!!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

States aren't required to enforce Federal immigration policy. States aren't free to enact laws that allow them to arrest people for violating federal immigration policy.

Not sure where the confusion lies...but obviously many of you are confused.

The confusion lies in your head.

Federal law allows state and local law enforcement to assist in enforcing immigration law. Arizona is not trying to enforce policy, and the portions of the law requiring employers to check the immigration status of the people they hire are actually required by federal law, Arizona just imposes harsher penalties on employers who violate it. The feds routinely argue that states have the right to make laws that are tougher than federal laws, even if those laws actually affect producers on a national level. They will happily file a brief in favor of California's new requirement that all eggs sold in their state come from hens with enough room to move around, even if those eggs come from outside the border of California.

Believe it or not, this is entirely a partisan and politically motivated suit, one that is opposed even by the current Democratic candidate for the governor of Arizona. If you want to maintain your reputation as a partisan hack, feel free to keep posting in favor of the suit against Arizona.

Torn in Two Different Directions - Video - FoxNews.com