Sheriff calls for school immigration checks (section 8, how much, transfer)

[Ponderosa]

Originally Posted by Greatday

He already is.

It think checking lawful residency states of kids in school is a good idea - how about you?

No I don't. I agree with the Pima County Sheriff on this:

"Dupnik said Tuesday he has no plans to conduct immigration sweeps at Tucson schools, calling it ``repulsive and repugnant.''

And tell me again, how many employers have been prosecuted under Arizona's "tough" immigration law? The only thing your hero Joe does is mug for the cameras while his storm troopers are hassling landscapers over broken taillights. The man is a coward. He is afraid of the Chamber. Real immigration enforcement focuses on the DEMAND not the SUPPLY - just like real drug enforcement.

[Greatday]

Originally Posted by Ponderosa

No I don't. I agree with the Pima County Sheriff on this:

"Dupnik said Tuesday he has no plans to conduct immigration sweeps at Tucson schools, calling it ``repulsive and repugnant.''

And tell me again, how many employers have been prosecuted under Arizona's "tough" immigration law? The only thing your hero Joe does is mug for the cameras while his storm troopers are hassling landscapers over broken taillights. The man is a coward. He is afraid of the Chamber. Real immigration enforcement focuses on the DEMAND not the SUPPLY - just like real drug enforcement.

Now that the 9th District has ruled they can be prosecuted, several cases are going forward - including the owner / manger of Wet and Wild

And, he was not talking about "sweeps" in schools. He was talking about REQUIRING TO REGISTER FOR SCHOOL proof of lawful residency. We used to be required to bring a birth certificate to register - what is so wrong with requireing that now???

BTW, the Sheriff does not "prosecute" cases (as you seem to imply with your comments about Arpaio). It's up to the County Attorney - and Thomas is taking cases forward

[Ponderosa]

Originally Posted by Greatday

Now that the 9th District has ruled they can be prosecuted, several cases are going forward - including the owner / manger of Wet and Wild

And, he was not talking about "sweeps" in schools. He was talking about REQUIRING TO REGISTER FOR SCHOOL proof of lawful residency. We used to be required to bring a birth certificate to register - what is so wrong with requireing that now???

BTW, the Sheriff does not "prosecute" cases (as you seem to imply with your comments about Arpaio). It's up to the County Attorney - and Thomas is taking cases forward

You can start with it being against the law for one thing. Public education is not a birthright of citizenship in the US, it is a right acquired by simple residency. And you still bring a birth certificate to register your kids the first time - or other proof of age not citizenship.

As for your "they are doing it" about prosecuting employers - Balderdash! I could find 500 illegals in 50 businesses in one day in any part of Phoenix. Why can't Joe? Coward, coward, coward....Yellow Joe! Joe Amarillo.

[Greatday]

Originally Posted by Ponderosa

You can start with it being against the law for one thing. Public education is not a birthright of citizenship in the US, it is a right acquired by simple residency. And you still bring a birth certificate to register your kids the first time - or other proof of age not citizenship.

As for your "they are doing it" about prosecuting employers - Balderdash! I could find 500 illegals in 50 businesses in one day in any part of Phoenix. Why can't Joe? Coward, coward, coward....Yellow Joe! Joe Amarillo.

Well, limiting our educational system to legal residents of the US is what is coming. Those here illegally will have to go elsewhere

And, you clearly do not understand the legal system - and I won't try to make you understand it here. But, it will suffice to say that you do not, in a situation like this, get 100's of defendants - you get a handful (which they have), wait for the law to be legally tested and appealed (which it has been - and upheld as constitutional) THEN you proceed with the handful of cases you have - get convictions - get the max penalties in each.

There is a saying that goes like this: You never want to be the test case.

Yes, the cases are now proceeding.

Deal with it

AND, you are also going to have to come to grips with the strong possibility that if a child is not a lawful resident of the United States, they will be denied enrollment in education facilities - not only in Arizona but other states that are looking at doing the very same thing.

[Ponderosa]

Originally Posted by Greatday

Well, limiting our educational system to legal residents of the US is what is coming. Those here illegally will have to go elsewhere

And, you clearly do not understand the legal system - and I won't try to make you understand it here. But, it will suffice to say that you do not, in a situation like this, get 100's of defendants - you get a handful (which they have), wait for the law to be legally tested and appealed (which it has been - and upheld as constitutional) THEN you proceed with the handful of cases you have - get convictions - get the max penalties in each.

There is a saying that goes like this: You never want to be the test case.

Yes, the cases are now proceeding.

Deal with it

AND, you are also going to have to come to grips with the strong possibility that if a child is not a lawful resident of the United States, they will be denied enrollment in education facilities - not only in Arizona but other states that are looking at doing the very same thing.

I really don't have to come to grips with anything. It is only those who use illegal immigration as camouflage - rather transparently I would add - for their racism that care so passionately about this issue.

[Greatday]

Originally Posted by Ponderosa

I really don't have to come to grips with anything. It is only those who use illegal immigration as camouflage - rather transparently I would add - for their racism that care so passionately about this issue.

Racism? You have got to be kidding??

I strongly support LAWFUL immigration - always have.

But, I strongly oppose UNLAWFUL immigration - always have. This is not being racist! How ridiculous!

Yeah - I'm a White guy who adopted an African American young lady - yeah - I'm racist

ROFLMAOOOOOOOO

[mikec34]

Do illegals pay taxes? When they buy a house, do they pay property tax? When they get a paycheck from their American employer, do they get state and federal tax taken out? Anyone know if an illegal can file taxes at all or own property?

[Vicman]

The basic outcome of Plyler v. Doe in the 1980s is that states cannot obstruct illegals from enrolling kids in school.

Does this sheriff think he can really do this?

[Greatday]

Originally Posted by Vicman

The basic outcome of Plyler v. Doe in the 1980s is that states cannot obstruct illegals from enrolling kids in school.

Does this sheriff think he can really do this?

Yes, I believe he does - the Arizona legislature is considering changes in ARS that would allow such verification.

[Vicman]

Originally Posted by Greatday

Yes, I believe he does - the Arizona legislature is considering changes in ARS that would allow such verification.

Well, Arizona would have to go against the previous Plyler v. Doe US Supreme Court ruling; it was made as the judges ruled that the children cannot be punished for their parents' decisions.

Oyez has information on the Plyler v. Doe case: Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982), U.S. Supreme Court Case Summary & Oral Argument

Oyez said: "Yes. The Court reasoned that illegal aliens and their children, though not citizens of the United States or Texas, are people "in any ordinary sense of the term" and, therefore, are afforded Fourteenth Amendment protections. Since the state law severely disadvantaged the children of illegal aliens, by denying them the right to an education, and because Texas could not prove that the regulation was needed to serve a "compelling state interest," the Court struck down the law."