Activist Judge Blocks Arizona SB1070

#206
#206
CSpindizzy said:
They ask employers to verify for work.

Just don't speed or break the law and they won't have to check your papers. How dare anyone check your legal status....the job checking if you're a felon...shame on you. The day care checking to see if you're a pedophile...naughty....the polling place to see if you're registered, a felon, etc. The audacity of checking someone to see if they're on the up and up. I guess next time I get pulled over, I will insist the cops not check for outstanding warrants or anything else on my history....
Click to expand...

But what about the case that the Judge stated in which in Tucson over 31,000 were held in custody because they didn't have their papers on them but were here legally. What about those people? Is that just price of doing business?
 
#207
#207
what was the judge's reasoning for now allowing illegal immigrants to seek work even though it's illegal for anyone to hire them? Not sure she thought that one through
 
#208
#208
volholio said:
But what about the case that the Judge stated in which in Tucson over 31,000 were held in custody because they didn't have their papers on them but were here legally. What about those people? Is that just price of doing business?
Click to expand...

pretty much. Don't the authorities need to identify people before letting them go?

Oh and this is part of the fed law

A green card is issued to all permanent residents as proof that they are authorized to live and work in the United States. If you are a permanent resident age 18 or older, you are required to have a valid green card in your possession at all times. Current green cards are valid for 10 years, or 2 years in the case of a conditional resident, and must be renewed before the card expires.
Click to expand...
USCIS - After a Green Card is Granted
 
#209
#209
CSpindizzy said:
So inquiries to ICE about legal status is redirecting federal resources away from what they are supposed to be doing? How does asking the experts and to whose domain the issue resides burdening them and redirecting resources away? God forbid we ask the guy who gets paid a fat salary to do this daily have to increase his workload. Type faster monkey! Or better yet a state law enforcement officer to merely connect to a federal server a few more times a day.

Again, this would not even be an issue if the federal government were actually doing what they claim the states are usurping on. You cannot usurp on a matter that is not even being carried out.

I know there was an issue here in GA about state universities checking the legal status of students. Perhaps those students can argue against states inquiring on that as well...
Click to expand...

You mean all 25 of those illegal immigrants in Georgia colleges and universities. Thank god we spent resources finding them.


What do you mean "it" is not being carried out?

Hasn't Obama deported more illegal aliens than Bush?

OPB News Under Obama, More Illegal Immigrants Sent Home

:hi:
 
#211
#211
utvolpj said:
pretty much. Don't the authorities need to identify people before letting them go?

Oh and this is part of the fed law

USCIS - After a Green Card is Granted
Click to expand...

Here's how the Judge, and United States, responds:

"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).) Under Section 2(B) of S.B. 1070, all arrestees will be required to prove their immigration status to the satisfaction of state
authorities, thus increasing the intrusion of police presence into the lives of legally-present aliens (and even United States citizens), who will necessarily be swept up by this requirement."
 
#212
#212
and 2 or 3 people have shown where that's pretty much absurd. But I'm sure you'll just copy/paste the judge again and we'll have to accept that answer.
 
#213
#213
utvolpj said:
who cares whose number is higher? Until the Pres can say "All are gone" they haven't done their job
Click to expand...

But he's doing it. Does that upset you?



"In a bid to remake the enforcement of federal immigration laws, the Obama administration is deporting record numbers of illegal immigrants and auditing hundreds of businesses that blithely hire undocumented workers.

The Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency expects to deport about 400,000 people this fiscal year, nearly 10 percent above the Bush administration's 2008 total and 25 percent more than were deported in 2007. The pace of company audits has roughly quadrupled since President George W. Bush's final year in office. "

washingtonpost.com

:hi:
 
#214
#214
utvolpj said:
what was the judge's reasoning for now allowing illegal immigrants to seek work even though it's illegal for anyone to hire them? Not sure she thought that one through
Click to expand...

Sure she did. She's going to selectively decide not to enforce that law too. See how easy it is if you just don't enforce the laws.
 
#216
#216
volholio said:
Here's how the Judge, and United States, responds:

"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).) Under Section 2(B) of S.B. 1070, all arrestees will be required to prove their immigration status to the satisfaction of state
authorities, thus increasing the intrusion of police presence into the lives of legally-present aliens (and even United States citizens), who will necessarily be swept up by this requirement."
Click to expand...

So what you're saying along with the judge is that this practice is OK for the Feds to do, but just not the states. So it is not an issue of illegal acts of detainment. It's that the states have no jurisdiction. She's not ruling that the act itself is wrong, just that the state cannot do it.
 
#217
#217
volholio said:
But he's doing it. Does that upset you?
Click to expand...

only reason it upsets me is you have men who are supposed to enforce the laws of the US but choose not to do it. Just because they do it a little doesn't make them suddenly worthwhile

and just an FYI, assuming party line followers in here can be dangerous
 
#218
#218
utvolpj said:
and 2 or 3 people have shown where that's pretty much absurd. But I'm sure you'll just copy/paste the judge again and we'll have to accept that answer.
Click to expand...

I don't care if you agree with her or not. You have to admit, however, that she uses legal precedent.
 
#219
#219
volholio said:
But he's doing it. Does that upset you?



"In a bid to remake the enforcement of federal immigration laws, the Obama administration is deporting record numbers of illegal immigrants and auditing hundreds of businesses that blithely hire undocumented workers.

The Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency expects to deport about 400,000 people this fiscal year, nearly 10 percent above the Bush administration's 2008 total and 25 percent more than were deported in 2007. The pace of company audits has roughly quadrupled since President George W. Bush's final year in office. "

washingtonpost.com

:hi:
Click to expand...

400,000? That doesn't even cover the number of illegals entering the U.S. in a single year, so if he's deporting only 400,000, then the number of illegals in the U.S. continues to grow every year. Being better than Bush's administration is no accomplishment. They were incompetent at securing the border too.
 
Last edited:
#220
#220
CSpindizzy said:
So what you're saying along with the judge is that this practice is OK for the Feds to do, but just not the states. So it is not an issue of illegal acts of detainment. It's that the states have no jurisdiction. She's not ruling that the act itself is wrong, just that the state cannot do it.
Click to expand...

I am not saying a thing. The Judge is. I'm not sure she's saying that it's ok for the Feds to do it. I think she's saying the Fed's don't round up legal citizens or residents and burden them by proving their innocence.
 
#221
#221
volholio said:
I don't care if you agree with her or not. You have to admit, however, that she uses legal precedent.
Click to expand...

so bad legal precedent makes it ok? We pay thousands of people to do the job that she says takes too long so we just aren't going to do it anymore? Think Obama will just fire those people and lower our taxes now?
 
#222
#222
Vol423 said:
400,000? That doesn't even cover the number of illegals entering the U.S. in a single year, so if he's deporting only 400,000, then the number of illegals in the U.S. continues to grow every year.
Click to expand...

So it is a lie you think?
 
#225
#225
volholio said:
I am not saying a thing. The Judge is. I'm not sure she's saying that it's ok for the Feds to do it. I think she's saying the Fed's don't round up legal citizens or residents and burden them by proving their innocence.
Click to expand...

That's B.S. Every single time you go to an airport, the Feds request you to provide documentation proving who you are. Quite frankly, I'm upset about me, as a DOCUMENTED U.S. citizen, being inconveniently detained at the security checkpoints to prove my legal status. Nevertheless, the federal government isn't the least bit concerned about inconveniencing me. They're only concerned about inconveniencing people that are here illegally and may throw a vote their way for looking the other way and kicking all kinds of taxpayer-provided free health and education benefits their way.
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top