Texas sues Feds of Syrian invaders

[Siete]

Texas Sues to Block Syrian Refugees

Good. I hope they can at least drag it out in court until Trump wins.

you need to work on titles for threads ... consult with any 6 year old.

Trump fan huh? ... figures.

Multitasking is not my strong suit. SUE ME!

indeed.

 

[BULLDOG]

The Texas lawsuit will fail for the same reasons Arizona's lawsuit failed:

'The Federal Government's broad, undoubted power over immigration and alien status rests, in part, on its constitutional power to "establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization," Art. I, § 8, cl. 4, and on its inherent sovereign power to control and conduct foreign relations, see Toll v. Moreno, 458 U. S. 1, 10[*2495] .
[...]
The Supremacy Clause gives Congress the power to preempt state law. A statute may contain an express preemption provision, see, e.g., Chamber of Commerce of United States of America v. Whiting, 563 U. S. ___, ___, but state law must also give way to federal law in at least two other circumstances. First, States are precluded from regulating conduct in a field that Congress has determined must be regulated by its exclusive governance. See Gade v. National Solid Wastes Management Assn., 505 U. S. 88, 115. Intent can be inferred from a framework of regulation "so pervasive . . . that Congress left no room for the States to supplement it" or where [***2] a "federal interest is so dominant that the federal system will be assumed to preclude enforcement of state laws on the same subject." Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp., 331 U. S. 218, 230. Second,[**363] state laws are preempted when they conflict with federal law, including when they stand "as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress." Hines v.Davidowitz, 312 U. S. 52, 67. Pp. 7-8.'

Bloomberg Law - Document - Arizona v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 2492, 183 L. Ed. 2d 351, 115 FEP Cases 353, 80 U.S.L.W. 4539 (2012), Court Opinion

well, if the gvt insists on importing terrorists to this country texas can take some "extra legal" actions to protect its citizens, since the fed gvt refuses and instead tries to hide behind legalese and jargon...

"Extra legal"? I thought you crazy right wingers were all about claiming the rule of law. I guess that only matters when it's in your favor.

the government is evading the law.
It'll be handled when we get an american patriot in office next cycle, though.
Practice whining about PRESIDENT trump now so you can get used to it.

Sorry,but I tried saying President Trump once and had a giggling fit. Trump will never be president. There aren't enough crazies to elect him.

 

[Rotagilla]

The Texas lawsuit will fail for the same reasons Arizona's lawsuit failed:

'The Federal Government's broad, undoubted power over immigration and alien status rests, in part, on its constitutional power to "establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization," Art. I, § 8, cl. 4, and on its inherent sovereign power to control and conduct foreign relations, see Toll v. Moreno, 458 U. S. 1, 10[*2495] .
[...]
The Supremacy Clause gives Congress the power to preempt state law. A statute may contain an express preemption provision, see, e.g., Chamber of Commerce of United States of America v. Whiting, 563 U. S. ___, ___, but state law must also give way to federal law in at least two other circumstances. First, States are precluded from regulating conduct in a field that Congress has determined must be regulated by its exclusive governance. See Gade v. National Solid Wastes Management Assn., 505 U. S. 88, 115. Intent can be inferred from a framework of regulation "so pervasive . . . that Congress left no room for the States to supplement it" or where [***2] a "federal interest is so dominant that the federal system will be assumed to preclude enforcement of state laws on the same subject." Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp., 331 U. S. 218, 230. Second,[**363] state laws are preempted when they conflict with federal law, including when they stand "as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress." Hines v.Davidowitz, 312 U. S. 52, 67. Pp. 7-8.'

Bloomberg Law - Document - Arizona v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 2492, 183 L. Ed. 2d 351, 115 FEP Cases 353, 80 U.S.L.W. 4539 (2012), Court Opinion

well, if the gvt insists on importing terrorists to this country texas can take some "extra legal" actions to protect its citizens, since the fed gvt refuses and instead tries to hide behind legalese and jargon...

"Extra legal"? I thought you crazy right wingers were all about claiming the rule of law. I guess that only matters when it's in your favor.

the government is evading the law.
It'll be handled when we get an american patriot in office next cycle, though.
Practice whining about PRESIDENT trump now so you can get used to it.

Sorry,but I tried saying President Trump once and had a giggling fit. Trump will never be president. There aren't enough crazies to elect him.

of course there aren't enough crazies to elect him..he isn't relying on the crazy vote, the democrats have that locked up......american patriots are the ones that are going to elect him.

 

[ogibillm]

Do you not care that the constitution is crystal clear on this and Texas has no power whatsoever to deny those refugees?

You mistakenly believe 'conservatives' when they crow about their 'love' of the constitution

 

[ogibillm]

The Texas lawsuit will fail for the same reasons Arizona's lawsuit failed:

'The Federal Government's broad, undoubted power over immigration and alien status rests, in part, on its constitutional power to "establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization," Art. I, § 8, cl. 4, and on its inherent sovereign power to control and conduct foreign relations, see Toll v. Moreno, 458 U. S. 1, 10[*2495] .
[...]
The Supremacy Clause gives Congress the power to preempt state law. A statute may contain an express preemption provision, see, e.g., Chamber of Commerce of United States of America v. Whiting, 563 U. S. ___, ___, but state law must also give way to federal law in at least two other circumstances. First, States are precluded from regulating conduct in a field that Congress has determined must be regulated by its exclusive governance. See Gade v. National Solid Wastes Management Assn., 505 U. S. 88, 115. Intent can be inferred from a framework of regulation "so pervasive . . . that Congress left no room for the States to supplement it" or where [***2] a "federal interest is so dominant that the federal system will be assumed to preclude enforcement of state laws on the same subject." Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp., 331 U. S. 218, 230. Second,[**363] state laws are preempted when they conflict with federal law, including when they stand "as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress." Hines v.Davidowitz, 312 U. S. 52, 67. Pp. 7-8.'

Bloomberg Law - Document - Arizona v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 2492, 183 L. Ed. 2d 351, 115 FEP Cases 353, 80 U.S.L.W. 4539 (2012), Court Opinion

well, if the gvt insists on importing terrorists to this country texas can take some "extra legal" actions to protect its citizens, since the fed gvt refuses and instead tries to hide behind legalese and jargon...

"Extra legal"? I thought you crazy right wingers were all about claiming the rule of law. I guess that only matters when it's in your favor.

the government is evading the law.
It'll be handled when we get an american patriot in office next cycle, though.
Practice whining about PRESIDENT trump now so you can get used to it.

Sorry,but I tried saying President Trump once and had a giggling fit. Trump will never be president. There aren't enough crazies to elect him.

of course there aren't enough crazies to elect him..he isn't relying on the crazy vote, the democrats have that locked up......american patriots are the ones that are going to elect him.

Does it take conscious effort to be that delusional?

 

[Rotagilla]

well, if the gvt insists on importing terrorists to this country texas can take some "extra legal" actions to protect its citizens, since the fed gvt refuses and instead tries to hide behind legalese and jargon...

"Extra legal"? I thought you crazy right wingers were all about claiming the rule of law. I guess that only matters when it's in your favor.

the government is evading the law.
It'll be handled when we get an american patriot in office next cycle, though.
Practice whining about PRESIDENT trump now so you can get used to it.

Sorry,but I tried saying President Trump once and had a giggling fit. Trump will never be president. There aren't enough crazies to elect him.

of course there aren't enough crazies to elect him..he isn't relying on the crazy vote, the democrats have that locked up......american patriots are the ones that are going to elect him.

Does it take conscious effort to be that delusional?

you tell me..I'll have to defer to your vastly superior experience in "delusional"

 

[Rotagilla]

Do you not care that the constitution is crystal clear on this and Texas has no power whatsoever to deny those refugees?

You mistakenly believe 'conservatives' when they crow about their 'love' of the constitution

The constitution has provisions for treason in office by the president.

 

[Siete]

The Texas lawsuit will fail for the same reasons Arizona's lawsuit failed:

'The Federal Government's broad, undoubted power over immigration and alien status rests, in part, on its constitutional power to "establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization," Art. I, § 8, cl. 4, and on its inherent sovereign power to control and conduct foreign relations, see Toll v. Moreno, 458 U. S. 1, 10[*2495] .
[...]
The Supremacy Clause gives Congress the power to preempt state law. A statute may contain an express preemption provision, see, e.g., Chamber of Commerce of United States of America v. Whiting, 563 U. S. ___, ___, but state law must also give way to federal law in at least two other circumstances. First, States are precluded from regulating conduct in a field that Congress has determined must be regulated by its exclusive governance. See Gade v. National Solid Wastes Management Assn., 505 U. S. 88, 115. Intent can be inferred from a framework of regulation "so pervasive . . . that Congress left no room for the States to supplement it" or where [***2] a "federal interest is so dominant that the federal system will be assumed to preclude enforcement of state laws on the same subject." Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp., 331 U. S. 218, 230. Second,[**363] state laws are preempted when they conflict with federal law, including when they stand "as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress." Hines v.Davidowitz, 312 U. S. 52, 67. Pp. 7-8.'

Bloomberg Law - Document - Arizona v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 2492, 183 L. Ed. 2d 351, 115 FEP Cases 353, 80 U.S.L.W. 4539 (2012), Court Opinion

well, if the gvt insists on importing terrorists to this country texas can take some "extra legal" actions to protect its citizens, since the fed gvt refuses and instead tries to hide behind legalese and jargon...

"Extra legal"? I thought you crazy right wingers were all about claiming the rule of law. I guess that only matters when it's in your favor.

the government is evading the law.
It'll be handled when we get an american patriot in office next cycle, though.
Practice whining about PRESIDENT trump now so you can get used to it.

Sorry,but I tried saying President Trump once and had a giggling fit. Trump will never be president. There aren't enough crazies to elect him.

of course there aren't enough crazies to elect him..he isn't relying on the crazy vote, the democrats have that locked up......american patriots are the ones that are going to elect him.

if you say so ..

 

[Rotagilla]

well, if the gvt insists on importing terrorists to this country texas can take some "extra legal" actions to protect its citizens, since the fed gvt refuses and instead tries to hide behind legalese and jargon...

"Extra legal"? I thought you crazy right wingers were all about claiming the rule of law. I guess that only matters when it's in your favor.

the government is evading the law.
It'll be handled when we get an american patriot in office next cycle, though.
Practice whining about PRESIDENT trump now so you can get used to it.

Sorry,but I tried saying President Trump once and had a giggling fit. Trump will never be president. There aren't enough crazies to elect him.

of course there aren't enough crazies to elect him..he isn't relying on the crazy vote, the democrats have that locked up......american patriots are the ones that are going to elect him.

if you say so ..

yup..I sure did say so.

 

[BULLDOG]

The Texas lawsuit will fail for the same reasons Arizona's lawsuit failed:

'The Federal Government's broad, undoubted power over immigration and alien status rests, in part, on its constitutional power to "establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization," Art. I, § 8, cl. 4, and on its inherent sovereign power to control and conduct foreign relations, see Toll v. Moreno, 458 U. S. 1, 10[*2495] .
[...]
The Supremacy Clause gives Congress the power to preempt state law. A statute may contain an express preemption provision, see, e.g., Chamber of Commerce of United States of America v. Whiting, 563 U. S. ___, ___, but state law must also give way to federal law in at least two other circumstances. First, States are precluded from regulating conduct in a field that Congress has determined must be regulated by its exclusive governance. See Gade v. National Solid Wastes Management Assn., 505 U. S. 88, 115. Intent can be inferred from a framework of regulation "so pervasive . . . that Congress left no room for the States to supplement it" or where [***2] a "federal interest is so dominant that the federal system will be assumed to preclude enforcement of state laws on the same subject." Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp., 331 U. S. 218, 230. Second,[**363] state laws are preempted when they conflict with federal law, including when they stand "as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress." Hines v.Davidowitz, 312 U. S. 52, 67. Pp. 7-8.'

Bloomberg Law - Document - Arizona v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 2492, 183 L. Ed. 2d 351, 115 FEP Cases 353, 80 U.S.L.W. 4539 (2012), Court Opinion

well, if the gvt insists on importing terrorists to this country texas can take some "extra legal" actions to protect its citizens, since the fed gvt refuses and instead tries to hide behind legalese and jargon...

"Extra legal"? I thought you crazy right wingers were all about claiming the rule of law. I guess that only matters when it's in your favor.

the government is evading the law.
It'll be handled when we get an american patriot in office next cycle, though.
Practice whining about PRESIDENT trump now so you can get used to it.

Sorry,but I tried saying President Trump once and had a giggling fit. Trump will never be president. There aren't enough crazies to elect him.

of course there aren't enough crazies to elect him..he isn't relying on the crazy vote, the democrats have that locked up......american patriots are the ones that are going to elect him.

You mean like the patriots that made this?

 

[Rotagilla]

well, if the gvt insists on importing terrorists to this country texas can take some "extra legal" actions to protect its citizens, since the fed gvt refuses and instead tries to hide behind legalese and jargon...

"Extra legal"? I thought you crazy right wingers were all about claiming the rule of law. I guess that only matters when it's in your favor.

the government is evading the law.
It'll be handled when we get an american patriot in office next cycle, though.
Practice whining about PRESIDENT trump now so you can get used to it.

Sorry,but I tried saying President Trump once and had a giggling fit. Trump will never be president. There aren't enough crazies to elect him.

of course there aren't enough crazies to elect him..he isn't relying on the crazy vote, the democrats have that locked up......american patriots are the ones that are going to elect him.

You mean like the patriots that made this?

good..now post a picture or cartoon of hitler...throw in some "it's bushs fault"..call us some names like "xenophobe" or "racist" and you'll have touched all the bases...

 

[BULLDOG]

"Extra legal"? I thought you crazy right wingers were all about claiming the rule of law. I guess that only matters when it's in your favor.

the government is evading the law.
It'll be handled when we get an american patriot in office next cycle, though.
Practice whining about PRESIDENT trump now so you can get used to it.

Sorry,but I tried saying President Trump once and had a giggling fit. Trump will never be president. There aren't enough crazies to elect him.

of course there aren't enough crazies to elect him..he isn't relying on the crazy vote, the democrats have that locked up......american patriots are the ones that are going to elect him.

You mean like the patriots that made this?

good..now post a picture or cartoon of hitler...throw in some "it's bushs fault"..call us some names like "xenophobe" or "racist" and you'll have touched all the bases...

No need for me to do it. Your posts make that perfectly clear.

 

[Rotagilla]

the government is evading the law.
It'll be handled when we get an american patriot in office next cycle, though.
Practice whining about PRESIDENT trump now so you can get used to it.

Sorry,but I tried saying President Trump once and had a giggling fit. Trump will never be president. There aren't enough crazies to elect him.

of course there aren't enough crazies to elect him..he isn't relying on the crazy vote, the democrats have that locked up......american patriots are the ones that are going to elect him.

You mean like the patriots that made this?

good..now post a picture or cartoon of hitler...throw in some "it's bushs fault"..call us some names like "xenophobe" or "racist" and you'll have touched all the bases...

No need for me to do it. Your posts make that perfectly clear.

mmmhmmm..whatever you say, terrorist sympathizer...

 

[BULLDOG]

Sorry,but I tried saying President Trump once and had a giggling fit. Trump will never be president. There aren't enough crazies to elect him.

of course there aren't enough crazies to elect him..he isn't relying on the crazy vote, the democrats have that locked up......american patriots are the ones that are going to elect him.

You mean like the patriots that made this?

good..now post a picture or cartoon of hitler...throw in some "it's bushs fault"..call us some names like "xenophobe" or "racist" and you'll have touched all the bases...

No need for me to do it. Your posts make that perfectly clear.

mmmhmmm..whatever you say, terrorist sympathizer...

Idiot.

 

[Rotagilla]

of course there aren't enough crazies to elect him..he isn't relying on the crazy vote, the democrats have that locked up......american patriots are the ones that are going to elect him.

You mean like the patriots that made this?

good..now post a picture or cartoon of hitler...throw in some "it's bushs fault"..call us some names like "xenophobe" or "racist" and you'll have touched all the bases...

No need for me to do it. Your posts make that perfectly clear.

mmmhmmm..whatever you say, terrorist sympathizer...

Idiot.

brilliant rebuttal..You're a deep thinker..I can just tell...

 

[ogibillm]

Do you not care that the constitution is crystal clear on this and Texas has no power whatsoever to deny those refugees?

You mistakenly believe 'conservatives' when they crow about their 'love' of the constitution

The constitution has provisions for treason in office by the president.

Lol. Again, how much effort does it take to be that delusional?

 

[Rotagilla]

Do you not care that the constitution is crystal clear on this and Texas has no power whatsoever to deny those refugees?

You mistakenly believe 'conservatives' when they crow about their 'love' of the constitution

The constitution has provisions for treason in office by the president.

Lol. Again, how much effort does it take to be that delusional?

you deny section III of the constitution?...and then call me "delusional"?...amusing.

 

[ogibillm]

Do you not care that the constitution is crystal clear on this and Texas has no power whatsoever to deny those refugees?

You mistakenly believe 'conservatives' when they crow about their 'love' of the constitution

The constitution has provisions for treason in office by the president.

Lol. Again, how much effort does it take to be that delusional?

you deny section III of the constitution?...and then call me "delusional"?...amusing.

You're delusional because you think allowing in refugees somehow constitutes treason

 

[Rotagilla]

Do you not care that the constitution is crystal clear on this and Texas has no power whatsoever to deny those refugees?

You mistakenly believe 'conservatives' when they crow about their 'love' of the constitution

The constitution has provisions for treason in office by the president.

Lol. Again, how much effort does it take to be that delusional?

you deny section III of the constitution?...and then call me "delusional"?...amusing.

You're delusional because you think allowing in refugees somehow constitutes treason

purposely bypassing immigration laws to allow terrorists into the country is treason, by definition.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Texas Sues to Block Syrian Refugees

Good. I hope they can at least drag it out in court until Trump wins.

"I hope we win."