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.
I've already responded to you by telling you exactly what the court ruling said. You are simply being obtuse.
The answer is found in the The Supremacy Clause and preemption doctrine. Open up a legal book and learn for yourself or don't be surprised if I ignore you when you keep rephrasing a stupid question which has already been answered. Alternatively, you could actually read the judge's ruling if you understand enough about the legal system to comprehend what he said. Now, if you will excuse me I need to get ready for work.
I've already responded to you by telling you exactly what the court ruling said. You are simply being obtuse.
The answer is found in the The Supremacy Clause and preemption doctrine.
Ahh no.. The Supremacy Clause says that you cant write laws contrary to federal law, and laws written by the federal government must be followed by the states. It doesnt say anything about writing law to SUPPORT federal law..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oerdin
Open up a legal book and learn for yourself or don't be surprised if I ignore you when you keep rephrasing a stupid question which has already been answered.
Translation, you have no answer and can only keep repeating what you've heard someone else say.. You'll find I'm pretty well versed in the law, I've been involved in probably 50 lawsuits, listed as lead plaintiff for numerous class action lawsuits, and even have argued in federal court for trademark infringements.. So again, do you want to tell me what part of the Constitution says you cant write laws in SUPPORT of federal laws, and again, why you think its good that you or I can be arrested, but not illegal aliens?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oerdin
Alternatively, you could actually read the judge's ruling if you understand enough about the legal system to comprehend what he said. Now, if you will excuse me I need to get ready for work.
I could, but the judge is offering a legal opinion which is being challenged. They get overruled all the time.. Again, anotherwords, you are relying upon someone elses opinion and cant discuss the issue rationality yourself? I've asked you FOUR questions, you havent answered one of them.. Sorry but claiming you have, when you havent isnt a reply..
I have.. You've also avoided the issue and not responded, only trying to change the subject.. Again
1) Why do you think its good that you or I could be arrested, but not illegal aliens?
2) The Supreme Court has already ruled that its legal to require identification
3) The state can not right to write law CONTRARY to federal law.. They do have a right to create laws in SUPPORT of federal law..
Here, I'll answer the questions
1) Undocumented aliens may be arrested I see it everyday. False premise
2) Please explain this question and define the scope because in general ID isn't required for US citizens on demand. Case law please.
3) SB 1070 created state immigration crimes. These are contrary to federal law. Unlawful presence is a civil infraction akin to a speeding ticket. However, AZ SB 1070 would have made it a crime with fines and a 20 day jail sentence. Susan Bolton's ruling is based on the fact that the law is NOT the same. There is 287(g) compliance if that is all AZ sought. Furthermore, states may not enforce civil provisions of the INA. Again a false premise.
We'll see how long the injunction lasts as the case winds its way through the courts, but at least it's good news for now.
Indeed it is good news. Now the Obama Administration will have to sue Sanctuary Cities if they want to remain consistent. Or explain to all of us why they do not.
Sanctuary Cities are contrary to Federal Law, no?
Ah, the ole slippery slope is front and center. Looks like a great ride.
Indeed it is good news. Now the Obama Administration will have to sue Sanctuary Cities if they want to remain consistent. Or explain to all of us why they do not.
Sanctuary Cities are contrary to Federal Law, no?
Ah, the ole slippery slope is front and center. Looks like a great ride.
Good point. Just like drug legalization that the Obama administration allows states like California to do are contrary to federal law.
I've lived in Arizona for 18 years, and I've watched the police single out Hispanics and pull them over, many many times. It got to be a game - which car will they pull over? Let's see ... there. The older car with Mexicans in it. Sure enough, that's the one they'd get.
And I don't even live in Maricopa County.
I live right on the border and it's the exact reverse of what you say. Americans are pulled over and are expected to show a drivers license and proof of insurance, and be wearing seat belts. If the police see a car filled with "hispanics" (although we all know hispanics can be any race don't we?) they won't pull them over because it's like "why bother", they aren't going to have drivers license, insurance, safety inspection stickers and the police can't do anything about them if they're illegally in this country.
It's Americans being profiled and singled out. But with this ruling, what happens if a police demands to see ID from only Americans? If illegals cannot be asked for ID then how can the police discriminate against Americans?
Why do you hate america? Thats the only possible rationality for someone thinking its good that states are banned from passing new laws..
In particular.. Section 6 of S.B. 1070
A.R.S. § 13-3883(A)(5): authorizing the warrantless arrest of a person where there is probable cause to believe the person has committed a public offense that makes the person removable from the United States
So you or I could be arrested, warrantless, but now illegal aliens cant be? Explain why this is good because I'm having a hard time understanding your rationality..
It's just like drugs in your car. If you have a few pounds of cocaine in your car, you can be arrested by local police for it - even though the drug laws are federal laws.
What about all the other federal laws? Does this mean local police are never to become involved in any kind of crime if it's at the federal level? What if a state trooper finds evidence someone is planning to carry out some federal crime? Just ignore it?
1) Undocumented aliens may be arrested I see it everyday. False premise
You obviously didnt read the OP and his celebration of the END to Section 6 of S.B. 1070
A.R.S. § 13-3883(A)(5): authorizing the warrantless arrest of a person where there is probable cause to believe the person has committed a public offense that makes the person removable from the United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by mauiwowie
2) Please explain this question and define the scope because in general ID isn't required for US citizens on demand. Case law please.
Supreme court challenge, Hiibel v Sixth Judicial District Court, 542 US 177 (2004), Supreme Court stated that state laws requiring identification was legal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mauiwowie
3) SB 1070 created state immigration crimes. These are contrary to federal law. Unlawful presence is a civil infraction akin to a speeding ticket. However, AZ SB 1070 would have made it a crime with fines and a 20 day jail sentence. Susan Bolton's ruling is based on the fact that the law is NOT the same. There is 287(g) compliance if that is all AZ sought. Furthermore, states may not enforce civil provisions of the INA. Again a false premise.
They were not contrary to federal law, SB 1070 was THE EXACT same thing as the federal law. Its not an infraction similar to a speeding ticket, do you understand that the federal government deports people DAILY for simply "being here" illegally?
States were not enforcing civil provisions of the INA, Arizona was turning these individuals over to the federal government to enforce the provisions..
And finally, when the federal government mandates states cover expenses for illegal aliens, then states have not only the authority, but an obligation to minimize damages..
It's just like drugs in your car. If you have a few pounds of cocaine in your car, you can be arrested by local police for it - even though the drug laws are federal laws.
What about all the other federal laws? Does this mean local police are never to become involved in any kind of crime if it's at the federal level? What if a state trooper finds evidence someone is planning to carry out some federal crime? Just ignore it?
Federal government has a law, states can create laws stronger than the federal law, but not weaker, nor can they write laws that say the federal law is invalid.
But thats not what they are doing here.. they simply copied the federal law, making it a state law, a right every state in this country must protect. These people who think states are not allowed to write laws stronger than the federal government clearly hasnt though about the many many instances in which states already do...
Other examples are California writes LOTS of laws stronger than federal laws.. Environmental car standards for example. Is California in violation of federal law and banned from writing environmental standards because environmental air laws are federal obligations? Of course not... Left wingers LOVE when states write laws stronger than the federal government when its to their liking though.. dont they?
Are liberals now stating they dont want states to write water polution laws stronger than the federal government for example? Water has already been deemed a federal obligation because it crosses state lines. Or even worse, are they now stating that water polution laws are illegal and companies dont need to pay attention to them? See the slippery slide they are starting?
Last edited by pghquest; 07-29-2010 at 09:05 AM..
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.
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.
