Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-07-2010, 11:49 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,863 posts, read 46,645,820 times
Reputation: 18521

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
The major problem with this law is the requirement for someone to prove they are a citizen to a State official. State officials do not have the right to ask.

July 29th, the State officials will have every right, granted to them by the state.

It will be awesome to see the mass exodus of illegals from Arizona.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-07-2010, 11:51 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,863 posts, read 46,645,820 times
Reputation: 18521
Only the criminals and corrupt, don't want laws enforced.

Where do you stand?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2010, 12:16 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,827,269 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
Where does it encroach? It is not a severe as the federal laws. Local police and law officials, enforce federal drug laws, do they not?
If an agency has been granted the authority to enforce the federal laws, yes. When they are not, they can' devise their own. It would be deemed an encroachment. For example, Congress is entitled to provide for organizing, arming and disciplining the militia while states are entitled to appoint the officers and have the authority to train under the guidelines provided by the congress. If any state decides to create its own militia, well, that would be encroachment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
Only the criminals and corrupt, don't want laws enforced.

Where do you stand?
An attempt to meet political and personal end by ignoring the constitution would be criminal. Where do you stand?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toyman at Jewel Lake View Post
By your position, the federal government has pre-empted states on employment law. EEO requirements are federal mandates, as such they may not be enforced by the states, according to your argument...
Its the law. And according article 6 of the US constitution establishes the supremacy:
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

In other words, states can add to, but not replace or override federal laws. In fact, as it pertains to EEO, many states have an expanded version of the law that goes beyond the minimum set by the federal government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2010, 12:26 PM
 
Location: Michigan
5,376 posts, read 5,348,269 times
Reputation: 1633
My only comment on this post (as the topic wont be solved here, to everybody's satisfaction, ever):

You are not a "citizen" of a state, county, city, village or township.
You are a resident.

You can not immigrate from or to any of the above from another country.
Legally or otherwise.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2010, 12:45 PM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,863 posts, read 46,645,820 times
Reputation: 18521
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
If an agency has been granted the authority to enforce the federal laws, yes. When they are not, they can' devise their own. It would be deemed an encroachment. For example, Congress is entitled to provide for organizing, arming and disciplining the militia while states are entitled to appoint the officers and have the authority to train under the guidelines provided by the congress. If any state decides to create its own militia, well, that would be encroachment.


An attempt to meet political and personal end by ignoring the constitution would be criminal. Where do you stand?


Its the law. And according article 6 of the US constitution establishes the supremacy:
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

In other words, states can add to, but not replace or override federal laws. In fact, as it pertains to EEO, many states have an expanded version of the law that goes beyond the minimum set by the federal government.

Laws of the land are enforce by all law enforcement that have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution and its rights and laws.

It is not a severe as the federal laws.
Local police and law officials, enforce federal drug laws, do they not?

There is nothing in the 1986 Immigration act, that says local law enforcement can't enforce the laws?

Nothing in the Constitution says States cannot enforce federal laws.
Individual States can not make federal laws, but nothing stops them from enforcing or putting identical law on the State books.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2010, 12:56 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,827,269 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
Laws of the land are enforce by all law enforcement that have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution and its rights and laws.

It is not a severe as the federal laws.
Local police and law officials, enforce federal drug laws, do they not?

There is nothing in the 1986 Immigration act, that says local law enforcement can't enforce the laws?

Nothing in the Constitution says States cannot enforce federal laws.
Individual States can not make federal laws, but nothing stops them from enforcing or putting identical law on the State books.
You just repeated the post to which I had already responded. For that reason, here we go again...
If an agency has been granted the authority to enforce the federal laws, yes. When they are not, they can' devise their own. It would be deemed an encroachment. For example, Congress is entitled to provide for organizing, arming and disciplining the militia while states are entitled to appoint the officers and have the authority to train under the guidelines provided by the congress. If any state decides to create its own militia, well, that would be encroachment.

PS. States can (and are expected to) enforce federal laws, as I have clearly mentioned earlier referencing the constitution. But they can't supersede federal authority by creating their own version, again something I've now repeated.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2010, 01:06 PM
 
Location: Long Beach
2,347 posts, read 2,785,715 times
Reputation: 931
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
July 29th, the State officials will have every right, granted to them by the state.

It will be awesome to see the mass exodus of illegals from Arizona.
And money and work force....and any credibilty the fascist state of Arizona presented to the Union.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2010, 01:07 PM
 
Location: Pa
20,300 posts, read 22,227,263 times
Reputation: 6553
Quote:
Originally Posted by lmkcin View Post
This is simple....the law is unconstitutional, and yes it is clear cut.

No state has the authority granted to it in the US Constitution to form it's own immigration law. Immigration falls under the "foreign autority" of the Federal Government. States have no power to make laws pertaining to foreign relationships. That is the challenge to the law. Not over its clear racial undertones, but because it asserts power to the state, clearly not delegated to it.
Re: Article I Section 8: Congress is granted the power to create rules of Natuarlization [ie immigration too].
Re: Article IV Section 4: The United States shall protect them [the States] against invasion. [if you wish to call immigration an invasion].
In fact the Constitution makes no concession to the States to obtain foreign power-dealing with issues of a foreign nature [immigration, naturalization, duty, war, even sessesion].

Law Professors on Arizona Immigration Bill: It's Unconstitutional - Law Blog - WSJ

Arizona over stepped its bounds in this law. No one disagrees that something needs to be done [and if you think building a wall will help---I suggest you get on the other side of that wall]. The problem is economic. Punish the employers, and allow those who are already here a path to citizenship, just like every other Immigrant to our shores, and may enforce the laws we already have in place.
So your solution is to reward criminal behavior? Just like every other immigrant? Well the every other that you speak of was a legal immigrant. Just a bit of a difference between the 2 types. 1 had no respect for our laws nor our rights as a nation. The other respected us enough to obey our laws and enter legally.
Sort of like the difference between a burglar and an invited guest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2010, 01:09 PM
 
Location: Texas State Fair
8,560 posts, read 11,217,763 times
Reputation: 4258
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
You just repeated the post to which I had already responded. For that reason, here we go again...
If an agency has been granted the authority to enforce the federal laws, yes. When they are not, they can' devise their own. It would be deemed an encroachment. For example, Congress is entitled to provide for organizing, arming and disciplining the militia while states are entitled to appoint the officers and have the authority to train under the guidelines provided by the congress. If any state decides to create its own militia, well, that would be encroachment.

PS. States can (and are expected to) enforce federal laws, as I have clearly mentioned earlier referencing the constitution. But they can't supersede federal authority by creating their own version, again something I've now repeated.
So, although it is able, is the Federal Government expected to enforce federal laws?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2010, 01:11 PM
 
Location: Pa
20,300 posts, read 22,227,263 times
Reputation: 6553
Quote:
Originally Posted by tofurkey View Post
So, although it is able, is the Federal Government expected to enforce federal laws?
It is reasonable to expect the FED to enforce the law. What is unreasonable is for the Fed to make excuses and simply go through the motions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:29 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top