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.
On this we agree. And I believe the most effective tool to most quickly curtail the influx and/or presence of illegal aliens is to adopt and then enforce harsh penalties for employers who enable the illegals to enter/remain in the country. Let's 'dry up' the opportunities for illegals and then, when we get close to that point, we may really learn what supply of foreign workers we should allow into the country in the specific categories.
That will never happen. The 1%ers love their cheap foreign labor. The same reason that they outsource our jobs to China.
well that makes sense. 52% of american voted against romney.
46% of americans work.
meaning 54% dont.
yes 60% of americans probably do support illegal immigration.
personally i dont support anything illegal.
Those that do not support illegal immigration are not racists bastards. I am sure that a few are...most are just simple people who believe that if you have laws - laws are to be respected. If you do not respect the laws of a nation - then you do not respect the people of the nation...Liberals that do not respect rule of law do not respect people in general. To respect is to empower...You can not empower one group through the dis-empowerment of another- that's called abuse.
They would have to be rounded up before they could be deported.
I see comprehension and understanding isn't being followed. Where does it say they should be rounded-up? All it says is the same as what has been said, illegals should be deported, period. That doesn't mean to round them up, it simply means to deport them as they are caught instead of releasing them back into the public ala what ICE did with 2,000+ just recently.
Where in the U.S. Constitution does it say anything about illegal aliens?...
We've been over this before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaaBoom
Um, no it doesn't.
Quote:
Immigration
The Constitution never uses the word immigration, so how is it that the rules for immigrants, and quotas for countries, are set by the federal government and not by the state governments? After all, as the 10th Amendment states, are the powers not delegated to the United States held by the states, or the people?
The Supreme Court has ruled that the Congressional power to regulate naturalization, from Article 1, Section 8, includes the power to regulate immigration (see, for example, Hampton v. Mow Sun Wong, 426 U.S. 88 [1976]). It would not make sense to allow Congress to pass laws to determine how an immigrant becomes a naturalized resident if the Congress cannot determine how, or even if, that immigrant can come into the country in the first place. Just because the Constitution lacks the word immigration does not mean that it lacks the concept of immigration.
There is also an argument that immigration is an implied power of any sovereign nation, and as such, the federal government has the power to regulate immigration because the United States is a sovereign nation. While it is true that the United States is a sovereign nation, and it may be true that all sovereign nations have some powers inherent in that status, it is not necessary to determine if immigration is such a power that does not even require constitutional mention, because the Naturalization Clause handles the power.
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.