Activist Judge Blocks Arizona SB1070

#78
#78
volholio said:
are forced to show ID at the whim of a government official? And I thought you all hated government officials and wanted to shoot 'em all or something.

Or is that only the black ones?
Click to expand...

I'm not advocating more officers. I'm advocating those who are there being allowed to enforce the law that that legal citizens deem worthy of enforcement. Really weak effort at reframing and implying me a redneck. You're wrong, so take your incapable arse and find something else to do.

I have to provide documentation every time I'm pulled over. Why the hell can't a legal immigrant.

Nevermind, your concern was really about procedure. Even though she simply made up a scenario in her head to justify this silliness, she's right because she's just following rules.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
Last edited:
#79
#79
droski said:
i see. so when you get pulled over by a cop in your car and he asks for license and registration you go tell him to **** himself right?
Click to expand...

Do they not teach this stuff in High Schools anymore? Did Civics classes go by the wayside?

Your scenario falls under an American institution called, "probable cause."

If the officer doesn't have a reason to stop you, then she can't. If she does, I've got a lawyer I can lend you that can kick the State's ass for not minding it's own business when you were minding yours.

If you break the law, however, all bets are off.

You see, in America, we don't like cops being able to stop you for no reason. That's why we are Americans and others are not.

The cop has to have a warrant to search your house and your permission (or a warrant) to search your car.

That's why we aren't fascist or communist or totalitarian. It's about our freedom as citizens to walk around without fear of being asked for our damned papers unless we do something wrong.

Even that jerk Guiliani knew this and at least didn't ask for citizens papers nor ran background checks until they at least jay walked.

Arizona wants to ask you for your papers because the state doesn't like the way you look.

**** that.
 
Last edited:
#80
#80
volholio said:
are forced to show ID at the whim of a government official? And I thought you all hated government officials and wanted to shoot 'em all or something.

Or is that only the black ones?
Click to expand...

Every time a police officer stops you while you're driving, the first thing out of his mouth is "License and registration, please."
 
#81
#81
volholio said:
Do they not teach this stuff in High Schools anymore? Did Civics classes go by the wayside?

Your scenario falls under an American institution called, "probable cause."

You see, in America, we don't like cops being able to stop you for no reason. That's why we are Americans and others are not.

The cop has to have a warrant to search your house and your permission (or a warrant) to search your car.

That's why we aren't fascist or communist or totalitarian. It's about our freedom as citizens to walk around without fear of being asked for our damned papers unless we do something wrong.

Even that jerk Guiliani knew this and at least didn't ask for citizens papers nor ran background checks until they at least jay walked.

Arizona wants to ask you for your papers because the state doesn't like the way you look.

**** that.
Click to expand...

I see you haven't read the law.
 
#82
#82
volholio said:
Do they not teach this stuff in High Schools anymore? Did Civics classes go by the wayside?

Your scenario falls under an American institution called, "probable cause."

You see, in America, we don't like cops being able to stop you for no reason. That's why we are Americans and others are not.

The cop has to have a warrant to search your house and your permission (or a warrant) to search your car.

That's why we aren't fascist or communist or totalitarian. It's about our freedom as citizens to walk around without fear of being asked for our damned papers unless we do something wrong.

Even that jerk Guiliani knew this and at least didn't ask for citizens papers nor ran background checks until they at least jay walked.

Arizona wants to ask you for your papers because the state doesn't like the way you look.

**** that.
Click to expand...

And I'm fairly certain that there is language in that law that says you can only be asking if you have been stopped for another reason.......
 
#84
#84
Preserving the status quo? Or ignoring the law altogether? A judge's job is NOT to 'preserve the status quo'. A 'status quo' can be fluid and have nothing to do with a law on the books or the Constitution. Where did you learn constitutional law?
 
#85
#85
volholio said:
Do they not teach this stuff in High Schools anymore? Did Civics classes go by the wayside?

Your scenario falls under an American institution called, "probable cause."

If the officer doesn't have a reason to stop you, then she can't. If she does, I've got a lawyer I can lend you that can kick the State's ass for not minding it's own business when you were minding yours.

If you break the law, however, all bets are off.

You see, in America, we don't like cops being able to stop you for no reason. That's why we are Americans and others are not.

The cop has to have a warrant to search your house and your permission (or a warrant) to search your car.

That's why we aren't fascist or communist or totalitarian. It's about our freedom as citizens to walk around without fear of being asked for our damned papers unless we do something wrong.

Even that jerk Guiliani knew this and at least didn't ask for citizens papers nor ran background checks until they at least jay walked.

Arizona wants to ask you for your papers because the state doesn't like the way you look.

**** that.
Click to expand...

That's total BS but I'm sure you already know that, that is if you are in any way capable of objective thought.
 
#86
#86
volholio said:
Arizona wants to ask you for your papers because the state doesn't like the way you look.

**** that.
Click to expand...
Unless I am badly mistaken "looking Latino" does not meet AZ's threshold for enforcement. If you can cite reliable documentation otherwise It'd be appreciated.

(not that I wouldn't make up a reason to stop and frisk Sofia Vergara if I thought I could get away with it)
 
#87
#87
volholio said:
If you break the law, however, all bets are off.
Click to expand...

Interesting comment, considering this language, taken directly from the statute:

For any lawful stop, detention or arrest made by a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of this state or a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state in the enforcement of any other law or ordinance of a county, city or town or this state where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien and is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person, except if the determination may hinder or obstruct an investigation. [emphasis added]
 
#89
#89
The law says immigration status can only be checked as a result of being stopped for something else. If you are pulled over for speeding, THEN they can inquire as to your citizenship status. The irony is that states can pursue violation of federal laws in the realm of drug possession but not federal laws on citizenship status.

Since states and cities have said 'screw federal laws' on enforcement of issues like sanctuary cities, perhaps states should just refuse to carry out ANY federal laws and let the feds do everything on their own. I mean we don't want to cause undue burden on the process right?
 
#90
#90
Tenacious D said:
Interesting comment, considering this language, taken directly from the statute:

For any lawful stop, detention or arrest made by a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of this state or a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state in the enforcement of any other law or ordinance of a county, city or town or this state where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien and is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person, except if the determination may hinder or obstruct an investigation. [emphasis added]
Click to expand...

don't let pesky little facts get in the way of his lecture on legal procedure. Bro was only making the point that following procedure like this is anything but activist. In fact, activist shouldn't even apply to the courts because they're always following procedure and simply applying laws / rules.
 
#91
#91
volholio said:
Do they not teach this stuff in High Schools anymore? Did Civics classes go by the wayside?

Your scenario falls under an American institution called, "probable cause."

If the officer doesn't have a reason to stop you, then she can't. If she does, I've got a lawyer I can lend you that can kick the State's ass for not minding it's own business when you were minding yours.

If you break the law, however, all bets are off.

You see, in America, we don't like cops being able to stop you for no reason. That's why we are Americans and others are not.

The cop has to have a warrant to search your house and your permission (or a warrant) to search your car.

That's why we aren't fascist or communist or totalitarian. It's about our freedom as citizens to walk around without fear of being asked for our damned papers unless we do something wrong.

Even that jerk Guiliani knew this and at least didn't ask for citizens papers nor ran background checks until they at least jay walked.

Arizona wants to ask you for your papers because the state doesn't like the way you look.

**** that.
Click to expand...

Oh, you're one of the ignorant, a***s that haven't bothered to read the law, but think that you're brilliant enough to draw the conclusion that it's unconstitutional.
 
#92
#92
Vol423 said:
Oh, you're one of the ignorant, a***s that haven't bothered to read the law, but think that you're brilliant enough to draw the conclusion that it's unconstitutional.
Click to expand...

we're very damn lucky that Eric Holder approaches the world similarly.
 
#93
#93
Here's what the judge says:

"Applying the proper legal standards based upon well-established precedent, the Court
finds that the United States is likely to succeed on the merits in showing that the following
Sections of S.B. 1070 are preempted by federal law:

1) requiring that an officer make a reasonable attempt to
determine the immigration status of a person stopped,
detained or arrested if there is a reasonable suspicion that
the person is unlawfully present in the United States, and
requiring verification of the immigration status of any
person arrested prior to releasing that person

2) creating a crime for the failure to apply for or carry alien registration papers

and

3) creating a crime for an unauthorized alien to solicit, apply for, or perform work: authorizing the warrantless arrest of a person where there is probable cause to believe the person has committed a public offense that makes the person removable from the United States.


Here's why:

"Requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine theimmigration status of every person who is arrested burdens lawfully-present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked. Given the large number of people
who are technically “arrested” but never booked into jail or perhaps even transported to a law enforcement facility, detention time for this category of arrestee will certainly be extended during an immigration status verification. (See Escobar, et al. v. City of Tucson, et al., No. CV 10-249-TUC-SRB, Doc. 9, City of Tucson’s Answer & Cross-cl., ¶ 38 (stating that during
fiscal year 2009, Tucson used the cite-and-release procedure provided by A.R.S. § 13-3903
to “arrest” and immediately release 36,821 people).)

And according to the following precedent:

Hines, 312 U.S. at 68. In Hines, the Supreme Court found that,where the federal government, in the exercise of its superior authority in this field, has enacted a complete scheme of regulation and has therein provided a standard for the registration of aliens, states cannot, inconsistently with the purpose of Congress, conflict or interfere with, curtail or complement, the federal law, or enforce additional or auxiliary regulations.

312 U.S. at 66-67. Hines also stated that a state statute is preempted where it “stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress.” Id. at 67.

Looks like precedent to me.

But, hey, what do I know?

Anyhow, if you want to actually read the Court's decision, you can here.
 
Last edited:
#94
#94
Requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine theimmigration status of every person who is arrested

how hard is it to produce a drivers license? and if you got arrested anyway why shouldn't you have to verify who you are? as far as we know you have 10 warrents out for your arrest illegal or not?
 
Last edited:
#96
#96
volholio said:
Here's what the judge says:

"Applying the proper legal standards based upon well-established precedent, the Court
finds that the United States is likely to succeed on the merits in showing that the following
Sections of S.B. 1070 are preempted by federal law:

1) requiring that an officer make a reasonable attempt to
determine the immigration status of a person stopped,
detained or arrested if there is a reasonable suspicion that
the person is unlawfully present in the United States, and
requiring verification of the immigration status of any
person arrested prior to releasing that person

2) creating a crime forthe failure to apply for or carry alien registration papers

and

3) creating a crime for an unauthorized alien to solicit, apply for, or perform work: authorizing the warrantless arrest of a person where there is probable cause to believe the person has committed a public offense that makes the person removable from the United States.


Here's why:

"Requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine theimmigration status of every person who is arrested burdens lawfully-present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked. Given the large number of people
who are technically “arrested” but never booked into jail or perhaps even transported to a law enforcement facility, detention time for this category of arrestee will certainly be extended during an immigration status verification. (See Escobar, et al. v. City of Tucson, et al., No. CV 10-249-TUC-SRB, Doc. 9, City of Tucson’s Answer & Cross-cl., ¶ 38 (stating that during
fiscal year 2009, Tucson used the cite-and-release procedure provided by A.R.S. § 13-3903
to “arrest” and immediately release 36,821 people).)

Looks like precedent to me.

But, hey, what do I know?
Click to expand...
clearly little. Citing her own points to give her opinion merit is akin to citing Bible verses to support the creation story.

Did you actually read the gibberish you posted? Do you really want a judge making decisions who took any of that as preemptive to federal law?

The size of the reach made here says the author did not care about the message or the content, just that she had an excuse to do what our chief legal clowns wanted.
 
#97
#97
BigPapaVol said:
don't let pesky little facts get in the way of his lecture on legal procedure. Bro was only making the point that following procedure like this is anything but activist. In fact, activist shouldn't even apply to the courts because they're always following procedure and simply applying laws / rules.
Click to expand...

Here's what the judge wrote:

""Requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine theimmigration status of every person who is arrested burdens lawfully-present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked. Given the large number of people
who are technically “arrested” but never booked into jail or perhaps even transported to a law enforcement facility, detention time for this category of arrestee will certainly be extended during an immigration status verification. (See Escobar, et al. v. City of Tucson, et al., No. CV 10-249-TUC-SRB, Doc. 9, City of Tucson’s Answer & Cross-cl., ¶ 38 (stating that during
fiscal year 2009, Tucson used the cite-and-release procedure provided by A.R.S. § 13-3903
to “arrest” and immediately release 36,821 people).)


And:

"The United States contends that the impact on lawfully-present aliens of the
requirement that law enforcement officials, where practicable, check the immigration status
of a person lawfully stopped, detained, or arrested where there is reasonable suspicion that the
person is an alien and is unlawfully present will be exacerbated by several factors. (Id. at 28-
29.) First, the United States suggests that the impact on lawfully-present aliens is enhanced
because this requirement applies to stops for even very minor, non-criminal violations of state
law, including jaywalking, failing to have a dog on a leash, or riding a bicycle on the
sidewalk. (Id. at 28.) Also, the United States argues that the impact will be increased because
other provisions in S.B. 1070 put pressure on law enforcement agencies and officials to
enforce the immigration laws vigorously.10 (Id. at 29.)
Hines cautions against imposing burdens on lawfully-present aliens such as those
described above. See 312 U.S. at 73-74. Legal residents will certainly be swept up by this
requirement, particularly when the impacts of the provisions pressuring law enforcement agencies to enforce immigration laws are considered. See A.R.S. § 11-1051(A), (H). Certain
categories of people with transitional status and foreign visitors from countries that are part
of the Visa Waiver Program will not have readily available documentation of their
authorization to remain in the United States, thus potentially subjecting them to arrest or
detention, in addition to the burden of “the possibility of inquisitorial practices and police
surveillance.” Hines, 312 U.S. at 74. In Hines, the Supreme Court emphasized the important
federal responsibility to maintain international relationships, for the protection of American
citizens abroad as well as to ensure uniform national foreign policy. Id. at 62-66; see also
Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 700 (2001) (“We recognize . . . the Nation’s need to ‘speak
with one voice’ in immigration matters.”). The United States asserts, and the Court agrees,
that “the federal government has long rejected a system by which aliens’ papers are routinely
demanded and checked.” (Pl.’s Mot. at 26.)11 The Court finds that this requirement imposes
an unacceptable burden on lawfully-present aliens.

8 The Visa Waiver Program permits visitors from certain countries to enter the United States
without a visa, so long as various requirements are met. See, e.g., 8 U.S.C. § 1187; 8 C.F.R.
§§ 217.1-217.7.
9 Also, upon a check with LESC or a federally-authorized state official, the status of a United
States citizen might not be easily confirmable as many people born in the United States likely
do not have an entry in a DHS database.
10 These provisions include Sections 2(A) and 2(H), which, respectively, prohibit agencies
from restricting the enforcement of immigration laws and create a private right of action for
legal residents to sue agencies if they believe the laws are not being enforced aggressively
enough.
-
"
 
#99
#99
Vol423 said:
REAL DAMN HARD for all the illegals in Arizona.
Click to expand...

So if I don't have my "papers," then the state gov't should be able to hold me for as long as it wants till it, the state, deems me legal?

Obviously the Tucson case proves that this happened to 36,000 LEGAL immigrants and legal citizens.
 
#100
#100
droski said:
posting the full text doesn't make it any less giberish
Click to expand...

I didn't post the full text. I posted the part relevant to the quoted "law."

English is gibberish to you? Perhaps, I should check your papers, or test your language skills to see if you belong here.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top