Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
 [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 05-31-2010, 10:21 AM
 
Location: State of Jefferson coast
963 posts, read 3,020,687 times
Reputation: 1325

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winston Smith View Post
Yes, but the U.S. Constitution (Article 1, Section 8) assigns immigration responsibility to the U.S. Congress.
It does no such thing. Art. 1, Sec. 8 merely defines the powers of Congress, the federal legislative branch. It mentions the power of Congress to create courts, but is silent on the issue of immigration (the word "immigration" is entirely absent from the U.S. Constitution). Clause 4 states that Congress shall have power "To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization," but this isn't about naturalization, it's about illegal entry.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winston Smith View Post
By way of them, no one but a Federal District Court judge can decide who is or is not legally in the U.S. Just like the states cannot declare war or secede from the Union, the states have zero legal ground to assume decision-making of Federal judges on immigration matters. The Arizona law attempts to subvert the U.S. Constitution and give powers reserved for Federal judges to municipal public servants. Again, don't like it, change the Constitution.
Codification of illegal entry isn't dependent on the broad general delegation of powers assigned by the Constitution. U.S.C. Chapter 8, Section 1325 -- Improper Entry by Alien -- is ordinary federal law that is within the jurisdiction of the individual states powers to enforce federal law under the general construct of federalism. Arizona is not making new policy, but only directing law enforcement officials to use the same "probable cause" standard to enforce existing illegal entry law much in the same way as is used to enforce laws concerning driving under the influence or dealing in illicit substances.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winston Smith View Post
ETA: I don't care what they do in Brazil or any other country. The American standard is not measured by what other countries do.
In times of crisis, it's sometimes necessary to take a provocative stance. Arizona is well aware of its interpretative brinksmanship, but the illegal immigration flood has crested to emergency proportions. Think of Arizona as the Rosa Parks on the illegal immigration bus, standing up in opposition to a harmful status quo in order to force a more just outcome. The federal government has not been successful in securing the borders and has also not compensated the state for billions of dollars in state expenditures that have resulted from lack of border security. So Arizona does get to play the if-not-this-then-what? card...a question you might like to address. How should Arizona resolve the illegal immigration crisis? Anybody can raise objections. Implementing workable policy solutions in a proactive manner takes some guts, and yes, some risks. So...what's your solution?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-31-2010, 02:12 PM
 
Location: In a room above Mr. Charrington's shop
2,916 posts, read 11,039,242 times
Reputation: 1765
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenda-by-the-sea View Post
So...what's your solution?
Thanks for asking. My solution:

1. Create a path to legal residency for those not in the U.S. legally now. This will create a path to citizenship after 5 years of permanent residency.

2. Change U.S. economic and foreign policy in regards to Latin America -- stop meddling in the internal affairs of every country south of Mexico -- let those countries self-govern. (Mexico has a "get out of jail free card" with Washington D.C. because Mexico knows how deeply the U.S. depends on Mexico economically). Stop meddling means, among other things: stop strong arming those governments into agreeing with free-trade policies, like CAFTA. Stop undermining agriculture markets in Latin America with U.S. government-subsidized farm products. Stop that little habit of CIA-sponsored coup 'd etats and aggravated civil-war every time a Latin-American country elects a leader distasteful to Washington.

3. Focus on the real problem-makers with today's situation -- runaway, unregulated ponzi-scheme makers on Wall Street, who enrich themselves on sending the entire globe into economic ruin. Scapegoating some of the poorest people in the world, who are literally dying to come to America to clean our public toilets, is myopic and a distraction on a massive scale. Most Americans (those who work and own small businesses, anyway) have a lot more in common with the people coming across the southern border than with the institutions of big business and high finance right here at home, who are making paupers of us all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2010, 02:19 PM
 
Location: Central Coast
2,014 posts, read 5,497,885 times
Reputation: 836
Winston Smith, overall your ideas make sense.

I read a post from a conservative anti illegal guy the other day, and among his complaints were the rising prices of produce.
Well, Duh, a crop harvested largely by illegals, if you cut down on the numbers of illegals, you cut down on the number of harvesters, and that cuts down on supply, and prices go up.

Those who wish the illegals to go, remind me of the old proverb; becareful what you wish for, you might get it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2010, 03:45 PM
 
Location: State of Jefferson coast
963 posts, read 3,020,687 times
Reputation: 1325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winston Smith View Post
Thanks for asking. My solution:

1. Create a path to legal residency for those not in the U.S. legally now. This will create a path to citizenship after 5 years of permanent residency.
Amnesty...rewarding those who break the law...making illegal immigration a more certain and expedient path to permanent residency than legal immigration? We tried that in 1986 with the IRCA. How did that work out? The result was a flood of 20 million new illegal immigrants over the next two decades who got the message that all you have to do is sit tight for a few years and you'll eventually be "regularized"...so, come on over! Another amnesty program would do the same thing -- increase illegal immigration in the future. Amnesty doesn't even resolve the core issues of overpopulation and economic stress through immigration. It's a bit like coming up for a plan for cleaning up the current oil spill in the gulf without first plugging the hole that it's gushing out of.

It's impossible to be broadly supportive of immigration without respect to the rule of law. If you support legal immigration, you have to oppose illegal immigration because it subverts the intents and purposes of the policy. Illegal immigrants take jobs away from legal immigrants. If you are tolerant of illegal immigration, you are a de facto foe of legal immigration whether you know it or not. You're going to be some kind of immigration opponent no matter what you espouse.

#2 and #3 I can agree with in terms of general philosophy, but in terms of practical impact, there isn't any implementable policy here that will make a difference. When it comes to U.S. foreign policy in Third World nations, both interventionist and laissez-faire approaches have had equally disastrous outcomes when it comes to producing refugees. There are about three and a half billion people in the world living in a state of dire privation. What percentage of them do you think we can assimilate here (taking them all would increase our population more than ten fold) and how would that be a viable social justice solution for the rest of them ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2010, 04:49 PM
 
Location: In a room above Mr. Charrington's shop
2,916 posts, read 11,039,242 times
Reputation: 1765
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenda-by-the-sea View Post
Amnesty...rewarding those who break the law...making illegal immigration a more certain and expedient path to permanent residency than legal immigration? We tried that in 1986 with the IRCA. How did that work out? The result was a flood of 20 million new illegal immigrants....
The mid-80s was also a time when the U.S. was heavily involved in the "dirty wars" in Central America -- subverting the Ortega administraiton in Nicaragua and arming insurgent groups in Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador. Those insurgent groups murdered priests and nuns, tortured and killed the civilian population at will. As a result, the U.S. was flooded with immigrants from those countries. The newcomers found peace (relatively speaking) in the poorest, meanest districts of American cities, where they're subjected to more misery, crime and killings. With an America complacent with inner-city crime, the immigrants, out of a "can't beat 'em join 'em" desperation, form their own gangs. MS-13 has direct roots to those times in Los Angeles, with ties again to Washington's meddling.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2010, 05:07 PM
 
Location: Earth
17,440 posts, read 28,459,168 times
Reputation: 7472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winston Smith View Post
The mid-80s was also a time when the U.S. was heavily involved in the "dirty wars" in Central America -- subverting the Ortega administraiton in Nicaragua and arming insurgent groups in Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador. Those insurgent groups murdered priests and nuns, tortured and killed the civilian population at will. As a result, the U.S. was flooded with immigrants from those countries. The newcomers found peace (relatively speaking) in the poorest, meanest districts of American cities, where they're subjected to more misery, crime and killings. With an America complacent with inner-city crime, the immigrants, out of a "can't beat 'em join 'em" desperation, form their own gangs.
More accurately, it was because of being attacked by other gangs. Nothing generates more gangs like gangs themselves. MS13 came out of Salvadorans being hassled by 18th Street and 18th Street came out of Mexican immigrants being hassled by Clanton.

Quote:
MS-13 has direct roots to those times in Los Angeles, with ties again to Washington's meddling.
MS-13 is a product of blowback just like Al Qaeda and the Taliban are products of blowback.

There were reasons why there were few Salvadoran immigrants in the US outside of Florida before the late '70s, right when the US started intervening in the conflicts in El Salvador and other Central American countries.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2010, 05:32 PM
 
1,476 posts, read 2,017,074 times
Reputation: 704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenda-by-the-sea View Post
It does no such thing. Art. 1, Sec. 8 merely defines the powers of Congress, the federal legislative branch. It mentions the power of Congress to create courts, but is silent on the issue of immigration (the word "immigration" is entirely absent from the U.S. Constitution). Clause 4 states that Congress shall have power "To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization," but this isn't about naturalization, it's about illegal entry.



Codification of illegal entry isn't dependent on the broad general delegation of powers assigned by the Constitution. U.S.C. Chapter 8, Section 1325 -- Improper Entry by Alien -- is ordinary federal law that is within the jurisdiction of the individual states powers to enforce federal law under the general construct of federalism. Arizona is not making new policy, but only directing law enforcement officials to use the same "probable cause" standard to enforce existing illegal entry law much in the same way as is used to enforce laws concerning driving under the influence or dealing in illicit substances.



In times of crisis, it's sometimes necessary to take a provocative stance. Arizona is well aware of its interpretative brinksmanship, but the illegal immigration flood has crested to emergency proportions. Think of Arizona as the Rosa Parks on the illegal immigration bus, standing up in opposition to a harmful status quo in order to force a more just outcome. The federal government has not been successful in securing the borders and has also not compensated the state for billions of dollars in state expenditures that have resulted from lack of border security. So Arizona does get to play the if-not-this-then-what? card...a question you might like to address. How should Arizona resolve the illegal immigration crisis? Anybody can raise objections. Implementing workable policy solutions in a proactive manner takes some guts, and yes, some risks. So...what's your solution?
Impressive information. You deserve a round of applause!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2010, 09:40 AM
 
4,278 posts, read 5,155,532 times
Reputation: 2375
My friends live up there and they noticed more people are not buying anything from Hispanic business or people. They are tired of paying for all the illegals.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2010, 01:58 PM
 
Location: San Jose, CA
7,688 posts, read 29,048,141 times
Reputation: 3629
Quote:
Originally Posted by totsuka View Post
My friends live up there and they noticed more people are not buying anything from Hispanic business or people. They are tired of paying for all the illegals.
That's a tall order, pretty much anywhere that food is made or shelves are stocked will have Hispanics working..
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:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


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 > U.S. Forums > California

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top