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 06-25-2012, 12:56 PM
 
Location: OCEAN BREEZES AND VIEWS SAN CLEMENTE
19,899 posts, read 15,287,998 times
Reputation: 6451

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by theflipflop View Post
So let me see if i have this straight? Our biggest concern is that these illegals are not citizens, and therefore any tax money that goes to help them is wrong? What if we look at it from a different viewpoint. The term "citizen" is one we seem to hold by, but eliminate that term for a minute. What if we look at these illegals as human beings who live in our neighborhoods who hold down jobs and pay plenty in sales tax. Now what if we could also get them to pay federal taxes on earnings?

I worked in an industry where I was constantly around these illegals, and guess what? They're people too. They just lack the technical designation of citizen. But otherwise, they bleed red. Can't we come up with solutions that include these folks in the American fabric, instead on constantly seeking ways to exclude them? (And btw, I'm a card-carrying Republican, so don't blame my ideas on bleeding heart liberalism)
Yes it is called, you want the benefits of what America can offer you. You want a better life, for you and your family. Then come here legally, that will do it. No problem with those that truly want all America has to give, and they come with pride, in wanting to become citizens.

Well i saw what illegals do on a construction project, that no shi- about the industry, so don't get me started please. I reported my idiot contractor, and the illegal workers, if you can call them workers, Not. For their work, a child could have done better, so spare me the details.

They had lack of work ethics, and that was not the point, i did not pay to have illegal workers on my project that was huge. I loved getting the contractor and illegals in trouble in 0/10 and would do it again in a
heartbeat!
And if they truly want to be included, then gosh dang it, come here the way my ancestors, and many others did to become citizens, what a slap in the face to those people!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-25-2012, 12:58 PM
 
Location: Arizona
12,734 posts, read 7,355,472 times
Reputation: 6693
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmnita View Post
It looks like everyone thinks their side won and most of us are not attoneys so probably do not even completely understand what really happened. I don't know about the rest of you, but I intend on watching both CNN and FOX tonight. Maybe by watching both sides we will get a clearer idea of what this all means.

Nita
Good idea, Nita. As is usually the case when the Supreme Court rules, both sides win some and both sides lose some. The Heller decision on 2nd amendment is a good example. The right of an individual to bear arms was upheld while at the same time, that right was subject to reasonable restrictions. The Supreme Court has a long history of muddying the constitutional waters more often than not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2012, 12:58 PM
 
14,307 posts, read 11,146,155 times
Reputation: 2130
Quote:
Originally Posted by mco65 View Post
the biggest out cry that I can remember concerning the Arizona law was the profiling that Cops could do by asking for the subjects proof of citizenship.. seems the SCOTUS has upheld that part of the law.. and no one remembers the outcrys.. go figure.
Ok, I repeat again racial profiling is prohibited in the enforcement of all laws including this one (not lawfully could do as you are implying). Just because there might be a few cops that don't follow the letter of the law is not reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater so to speak. The outcries were not because that is what was actually happening it was mostly ethnocentrics who made that up so to stop the detection and deportation of those illegal aliens ethnically like themselves. There was no evidence whatsover that racial profiling was actually occuring Even if it were true (but it isn't) you suspend the duties of such cops. You don't stop enforcing the law altogether.

Apparently, you aren't aware that the SC has upheld the part of sb1070 that allows LE to check the status of a person when stopped under lawful contact if they can't provide a valid ID? That is what the cries were all about because the pro-illegals erroneously implied that racial profiling was happening before. Sorry, but this is loss for your side, not a win.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2012, 12:59 PM
Status: "As a wise man once said, “So?”" (set 26 days ago)
 
Location: Meggett, SC
10,443 posts, read 8,571,364 times
Reputation: 5800
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Ask yourself this, if there is no law requiring people to carry documentation of their citizenship, then if a police officer asks someone, and they don't have the documentation, what's the police officer going to do? Accompany them home to retrieve it? SCOTUS ruled, they can't compel people to carry documentation to establish citizenship, and they can't detain them in order to obtain such documentation.
Actually, I think this decision compels the Federal gov't to also assist; I caveat that with perhaps. Under this ruling, the local LEO can try and determine if the person is legal or not. That would require assistance from the Fed through their various databases. Currently, like in the case of Florida trying to purge their voter rolls of illegals, the Fed does not want to share that information with the States. Should be interesting to see if the Fed continues to bar assistance to the States in determining who is and is not legal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2012, 12:59 PM
 
39,020 posts, read 23,146,013 times
Reputation: 12146
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmnita View Post
It looks like everyone thinks their side won and most of us are not attoneys so probably do not even completely understand what really happened. I don't know about the rest of you, but I intend on watching both CNN and FOX tonight. Maybe by watching both sides we will get a clearer idea of what this all means.

Nita
Three main provisions of the law were struck down.

The fourth main provision was allowed to stand, not because SCOTUS considered it Constitutional, but because they deemed the implementation of that fourth provision would have to occur and the lower courts would have to define implementation for state officers, and how the lower courts defined its implementation would craft how the challenges to this provision would be made. In other words, the language of the law was too vague to weigh its Constitutionality, but the vagueness will be refined out by the lower courts as the state tries to implement it, and then, when it's more specific, it may be ready for legal review.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2012, 01:01 PM
 
14,307 posts, read 11,146,155 times
Reputation: 2130
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucknow View Post
If I was then it's the responsibility of The Ministry Immigration and no one else. Our LEOs do not concern themselves with matters that are not their responsibility.

It's a pretty poor excuse for a country that claims to value freedom to abuse everyones freedom and excuse it as the need for security from whoever. What we need more than anything in our free societies is freedom from the STATE. The basic nature of all governments is to take away freedoms from the people and the responsibility for all free peoples is to guard those freedoms. Our fathers, grandfathers and greatgrandfathers died for those freedoms and yet so many today will just roll over with a little whine or nothing at all when those freedoms are threatened.
How is sb1070 abusing any citizen or legal immigrant's freedoms? I say by detecting criminals and lawbreakers among us it protects our freedoms.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2012, 01:02 PM
 
39,020 posts, read 23,146,013 times
Reputation: 12146
Quote:
Originally Posted by southbel View Post
Actually, I think this decision compels the Federal gov't to also assist; I caveat that with perhaps. Under this ruling, the local LEO can try and determine if the person is legal or not. That would require assistance from the Fed through their various databases. Currently, like in the case of Florida trying to purge their voter rolls of illegals, the Fed does not want to share that information with the States. Should be interesting to see if the Fed continues to bar assistance to the States in determining who is and is not legal.
I don't think this decision compels anything on the part of the Federal government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2012, 01:03 PM
Status: "As a wise man once said, “So?”" (set 26 days ago)
 
Location: Meggett, SC
10,443 posts, read 8,571,364 times
Reputation: 5800
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
I don't think this decision compels anything on the part of the Federal government.
That's why I prefaced it with perhaps. I asked this question before and no one answered. What recourse do the States have if the Federal gov't refuses to enforce the law?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2012, 01:05 PM
 
Location: San Diego
32,799 posts, read 30,034,103 times
Reputation: 17687
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Ask yourself this, if there is no law requiring people to carry documentation of their citizenship, then if a police officer asks someone, and they don't have the documentation, what's the police officer going to do? Accompany them home to retrieve it? SCOTUS ruled, they can't compel people to carry documentation to establish citizenship, and they can't detain them in order to obtain such documentation.
You have the right to remain silent, you may ask to leave, if you don't leave the detainment is then legal. Since they usually don't speak English it looks like these detentions can be done as long as it takes to check for ID then over to ICE.

That's how I read it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2012, 01:05 PM
 
16,438 posts, read 18,513,116 times
Reputation: 9490
I hail this SC decision and now LE officers can actually ask if these illegals are in our country legaly or not. A`big step in the right direction!!
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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - 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 - Top