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.
The police have been arerstig people for violatign federal laws for years.the problem is the feds now actaully would do nayhtig once they take custody anymore. At one time illegal where arrested and held for immagration then the justice dept said they wre not interested in takig custody form them unless they had actually committed other crimes and then only after sentencing.It has gotten to where states and local governamnt have routinely now start say they would enforce others like drug laws and who know what in the future.
The DOJ wasn't after this law. The US Chambers of Commerce was fighting this law.
The DOJ was very much after this law. Its the reason Kagan recused herself since she was Solicitor General when this case was initially presented before the courts.
The court ruled 5 to 3 that Congress specifically allowed states such an option, and dismissed the objections of an unusual coalition that challenged the state law: the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, civil rights groups, labor unions and the Obama administration.
I know darn well what a fiibuster is, but that doesnt backup your claims. What one of these would have fixed illegal immigration issues?
I also note the dates, not one of them coordinate with the timeline in question, where Democrats held all 3 branches of government..
Try again.
Your point was that since democrats had the majority, they couldn't be stopped from implementing their policies. See, unlike you, I try to stick with the logic (but generally an emotional response) in the post I'm responding to.
Your point was that since democrats had the majority, they couldn't be stopped from implementing their policies. See, unlike you, I try to stick with the logic (but generally an emotional response) in the post I'm responding to.
So to prove to me that they were stopped, you provided a list of filibusters from when Democrats didnt have all 3 branches?
The police have been arerstig people for violatign federal laws for years.the problem is the feds now actaully would do nayhtig once they take custody anymore. At one time illegal where arrested and held for immagration then the justice dept said they wre not interested in takig custody form them unless they had actually committed other crimes and then only after sentencing.It has gotten to where states and local governamnt have routinely now start say they would enforce others like drug laws and who know what in the future.
So to prove to me that they were stopped, you provided a list of filibusters from when Democrats didnt have all 3 branches?
No, I was debunking a myth you were tossing in the air hoping it will be caught and celebrated, that being a majority means you have your way without any obstruction. It is, however, an idea most politicians like to sell to simpletons come election time.
No, I was debunking a myth you were tossing in the air hoping it will be caught and celebrated, that being a majority means you have your way without any obstruction.
The shame is, you didnt debunk anything but think you did.
Here, I'll give you another shot..
What bills did the GOP block during the period of time that the Democrats had CONTROL of all 3 branches of government which would have resolved the immigration issue?
The shame is, you didnt debunk anything but think you did.
Here, I'll give you another shot..
What bills did the GOP block during the period of time that the Democrats had CONTROL of all 3 branches of government which would have resolved the immigration issue?
States in fact can and now will start enforcing Federal laws, since the federal government won't enforce them.
Sets a big precedence!
States are equal in power to the fed as of now!
First, this Supreme Court decision says nothing about States enforcing federal immigration law. This decision was based upon an Arizona law, that makes E-Verify mandatory for all Arizona employers, and either suspends or revokes the license of those who do not comply.
Second, the Supreme Court has always held that States may enact their own immigration laws, providing they do not impose a stricter penalty for violations than the existing federal immigration laws.
Lastly, States actually have more power than the federal government. It only takes 34 State legislatures to form a State Constitutional Convention where they can undo anything the federal government has done, even alter the US Constitution without any input from the federal government. Providing, of course, they can get 38 State legislatures to ratify those changes.
Dont change the subject. You said they were BLOCKED by the GOP. What bills were blocked?
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.
