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.
Interesting. Really, I don't think that there's anything in the Constitution preventing States from passing an identical law to the Federal law and enforcing it. I think that this decision merely says that state executive branches can enforce federal laws and that it's unnecessary for the state legislatures to write an identical state law.
If there is a federal law deemed constitutional, it trumps a corresponding state law (Article 6, US Constitution).
Then why did it go to court? Why did obama fight it and take arazonia to court.
Because, under the US constitution, not Arizona but the Congress of the United States has the power to do what Arizona is trying to design for itself. Potentially also a violation of the fourth amendment.
If there is a federal law deemed constitutional, it trumps a corresponding state law (Article 6, US Constitution).
Yeah, but if they're both the same law? I could see if they were conflicting...
Article. VI.
...
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.
...
Spin away all you want. What is wrote is there for all to see. You are wrong, and trying to provoke me. It won't work.
i'm not trying to provoke anything, I simply quoted the Supreme Courts ruling that says you are wrong. Last I checked, the Suprme Court was the final say so on laws, not an anonymous web poster.
We cannot feasibly or affordably do anything to solve the problems of Mexico's poor. Poor people will and always will do what it takes to provide for their families. In this sense, they are far less culpable than traitorous American employers taking advantage of cheap labor by exploiting these people, paying them under the table to avoid paying a fair wage to a tax-paying American worker.
Crack down on the employers, and there will be fewer jobs here for illegals, and they will have to invade Venezuela and Cuba instead.
As for your misgivings, they are misplaced. Criminal convictions still require showing of knowledge and intent, and have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Since when is being required to obey the law equate to being a "government agent?" That makes no sense at all.
So you would fine businesses who mistakenly hire an illegal, but yet the federal agencies that permit them entry, bear no responsibility
Should we have the drive through cashiers at the Micky D's checking drivers license's next?
Yeah, but if they're both the same law? I could see if they were conflicting...
Article. VI.
...
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.
...
You are misunderstanding what you are quoting
The federal laws are the supreme laws, true, but that only matters if the state laws CONFLICT with the federal laws. These laws dont conflict. There is no federal law saying the states cant do "x".
States write laws all the time that overlap federal laws. Look at murder, rape, drugs for example.
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!
Barack Obama loses.....and the American people win
Quote:
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce filed a lawsuit against the state, arguing federal law prohibits Arizona and other states from making E-Verify use mandatory. The group was supported by a variety of civil rights and immigration rights groups.
Quote:
The Obama administration recommended a judicial review, and sided with businesses and civil rights groups.
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.
