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.
California’s legislature has decided that it is sound socio-economic policy to encourage the inflow of migrants and has passed legislation accordingly. It’s as simple as that. The State is not obliged to cooperate with the Federal government. Most of the armchair Constitutional scholars on this forum are simply wrong by relying on the premise that such cooperation is required.
If you disagree with the economic belief that the State with the highest agricultural output should increase the number of laborers in it, that’s completely defensible. But it’s a States rights issue.
No, illegal immigration is a federal issue. As for your comments about the agricultural industry in Calif. only 2% of illegals are working in that industry and for those jobs there are unlimited visas for legal, foreign workers. Most illegals here in this state and other states are doing jobs that Americans have always done for a fair wage.
ALL of the states agreed to Federal Law, and issues like immigration to be under Federal Law when they became states. I am a big proponent of states rights, but issues like immigration are clearly Federal. Sanctuary cities, and states are breaking the laws they agreed to follow. The politicians need to be charged with Federal crimes.
No, illegal immigration is a federal issue. As for your comments about the agricultural industry in Calif. only 2% of illegals are working in that industry and for those jobs there are unlimited visas for legal, foreign workers. Most illegals here in this state and other states are doing jobs that Americans have always done for a fair wage.
It sure is a Federal issue. Which is why no one on the State law enforcement level is compelled to cooperate with Federal law enforcement unless there is a warrant. Furthermore, privacy laws are a State's rights issue, and California absolutely has the right to require that employers keep their employment rolls private unless there is a warrant.
You may disagree with the policy, but that's the reality.
ALL of the states agreed to Federal Law, and issues like immigration to be under Federal Law when they became states. I am a big proponent of states rights, but issues like immigration are clearly Federal. Sanctuary cities, and states are breaking the laws they agreed to follow. The politicians need to be charged with Federal crimes.
It really has nothing to do with if any states agreed to anything. If a law exists Federally, ALL 50 states MUST comply with it. They cannot nullify or weaken it. MJ legalization falls under that as well. Federalism 101.
It sure is a Federal issue. Which is why no one on the State law enforcement level is compelled to cooperate with Federal law enforcement unless there is a warrant. Furthermore, privacy laws are a State's rights issue, and California absolutely has the right to require that employers keep their employment rolls private unless there is a warrant.
You may disagree with the policy, but that's the reality.
The Feds can come in with or without a warrant on immigration stuff. The states can't do a damn thing about it either. Same with legal MJ.
Either California follows federal law, or they can find their politicians locked up.
OR - we can take the next step and let them form their own country.
This can't continue as it is now. Enough is enough.
Does the same argument apply to States which have legalized medical and recreational pot?
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.