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.
Apparently it’s ok to use E-Verify as along as employers are not punished for “knowingly” hiring illegals. What’s wrong with this picture?
Quote:
The Obama administration has asked the Supreme Court to strike down a 2007 Arizona law that punishes employers who hire illegal aliens, a law enacted by then-Governor Janet Napolitano.
The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR): FAIR Legislative Update June 7, 2010 (http://www.fairus.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=23055&security=1601&news _iv_ctrl=1721#1 - broken link)
Quote:
On Monday, the Court announced that it will hear arguments in Chamber of Commerce of the U.S. of Am. V. Candelaria, in which the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld (pdf) the Legal Arizona Workers Act, Arizona’s immigration law mandating the use of the E-Verify employment verification system, and permitting the state to suspend or revoke employers’ business licenses if they knowingly hire undocumented workers. The question before the Court is whether these requirements are preempted by federal law, and therefore invalid.
In the eyes of the Federal Government, Arizona is overstepping their legal boundries by passing such laws that supercede the powers and responsibilities of the Federal government. As a fellow Arizonian, I understand the frustration the state government has with the inability to take action concerning illegal immigration. I also feel that there is a lot of conservative political strategy going on. It is in the best interests of republican conservative doctrine to hamstring the democrats on any comprehensive immigration reform and then stand back and scream how the government is doing nothing. It makes for great political theatre and scores voter points. On the other hand, it is the responsibility of the federal government to legally challenge any attempt to usurp their constitutional mandate when they perceive a threat to that mandate.
"it is the responsibility of the federal government to legally challenge any attempt to usurp their constitutional mandate when they perceive a threat to that mandate."
True, it is a responsibility of the feds to legally challenge any law that is meant to usurp federal law, and in which Arizona's law does not.
This issue was already been brought in front of a court in De Canas V. Bica.
"The Court could not identify any explicit statutory language in the INA indicating a congressional intent to preempt state and local regulation of the employment of illegal aliens, but rather found evidence that Congress intended states to regulate in this area"
In the eyes of the Federal Government, Arizona is overstepping their legal boundries by passing such laws that supercede the powers and responsibilities of the Federal government. As a fellow Arizonian, I understand the frustration the state government has with the inability to take action concerning illegal immigration. I also feel that there is a lot of conservative political strategy going on. It is in the best interests of republican conservative doctrine to hamstring the democrats on any comprehensive immigration reform and then stand back and scream how the government is doing nothing. It makes for great political theatre and scores voter points. On the other hand, it is the responsibility of the federal government to legally challenge any attempt to usurp their constitutional mandate when they perceive a threat to that mandate.
It is the responsibility of the federal government to secure the border and enforce CURRENT immigration law while crafting new legislation. Period.
Can you imagine the chaos if no laws were enforced because people wanted new legislation in place first?
In the eyes of the Federal Government, Arizona is overstepping their legal boundries by passing such laws that supercede the powers and responsibilities of the Federal government. As a fellow Arizonian, I understand the frustration the state government has with the inability to take action concerning illegal immigration. I also feel that there is a lot of conservative political strategy going on. It is in the best interests of republican conservative doctrine to hamstring the democrats on any comprehensive immigration reform and then stand back and scream how the government is doing nothing. It makes for great political theatre and scores voter points. On the other hand, it is the responsibility of the federal government to legally challenge any attempt to usurp their constitutional mandate when they perceive a threat to that mandate.
Not according to prior court rulings.
Quote:
To date, Arizona’s E-Verify law has been upheld by all lower courts, including the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Ninth Circuit, in particular, viewed it as an exercise of a state’s traditional power to regulate businesses.
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.
