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.
At the news briefing, Murray also claimed that the executive order violates the Constitution’s Spending Clause, saying the federal government “may not coerce local governments by denying them federal dollars if they are not to remain to the program in question. Yet that is exactly what the president’s order does.”
Laughable... where's he been at the last eight years? That was Obama's main leverage for controlling state and local governments.
At the news briefing, Murray also claimed that the executive order violates the Constitution’s Spending Clause, saying the federal government “may not coerce local governments by denying them federal dollars if they are not to remain to the program in question. Yet that is exactly what the president’s order does.”
Laughable... where's he been at the last eight years? That was Obama's main leverage for controlling state and local governments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-310
18 USC 2.
Aiding and abetting an unlawful act. Conspiracy to shield individuals engaged in unlawful activity.
They could just remove them from office and throw them in jail.
Can any law be passed anymore without it becoming tied up in the courts for years. Can anybody make any decision without Judges and attorneys getting involved? This is so stupid. What is the point of having a Federal Gov't if States and cities can do whatever they want? Can Democrats and liberals EVER accept defeat without crying to the courts? Sometimes you don't get your way in this life- grow up and deal with it, instead of having to pet therapy dogs, and whine and cry to mommy!
But coming here illegal is constitutional??? WHY IS EVERYTHING BACKWARDS!?!?
One Minute Constitutional Law Lesson: With the exception of the 13th Amendment, the U.S. Constitution is a document that limits government power or actions, not individual power or actions. Thus, people "coming here illegal[ly]" is neither constitutional nor unconstitutional, since it isn't granted or prohibited in the constitution.
The question is whether the federal government has a right to force States to act as their agent, without violating the Tenth Amendment.
That's funny. Somehow I knew you'd feel compelled to respond, since you are from Seattle. Didn't know you'd be the first though.
By the way, it's Seattle that wouldn't be complying with federal law. Or you can continue reading your leftist articles
It's a miracle I've yet to block you. Everything you say is either a deflection or some childish remark.
It is entirely constitutional for the city of Seattle to not personally enforce immigration law. Those are federal laws for the federal government to deal with. They simply do not allocate resources to look into the immigration status of people. While the exact methods vary, most will still report for certain felonies but if they pull someone over for speeding, city official won't spend time looking into their immigration status and reporting it to federal agents. If federal agents go looking for that individual, the city of Seattle won't actually hide them. This isn't technically illegal.
The federal government has been using financial means to blackmail states to "encourage" them to pass and enforce laws that support the "whim" of some federal bureaucrat for decades. Look at the 55mph speed limit. Speed limits are a state issue-many wanted higher ones when "55" went nationwide as a goal. The feds withheld highway funds for states that didn't comply. And that was all the way back in the 70s. More recently they did exactly the same thing with lowering limits to legal intoxication. Most states had .10 or a bit higher as part of their laws....the feds pushed for .08% BAC by withholding funds.
Zero difference here. Except, well, the above items are a legitimate issue for state laws. Assisting criminals in breaking our immigration laws-is not.
Can any law be passed anymore without it becoming tied up in the courts for years.
Here is the deal....
Every law, regulation, and restriction made by legislators and the Alphabet Agencies, take someones individual liberties(choices) and in more and more cases, their entire freedom to have a choice. That choice is denied or made for you.
After micro-managing people lives with law after law after law after law... All that is left for them to say "I made this law" is to step on so much liberty, it gets into Unconstitutional territory. Then emotions and feelings are used to justify it and a politically appointed judicial, that can change law at will, depending how they feel. Not what the law says.
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.
