New Arizona Immigration Law

#576
#576
I do not know much of anything about constitutional law but could a case be made that because the federal government has failed to regulate properly a state has the right to enact powers that authorize them to regulate within their borders?
 
#578
#578
utvolpj said:
I don't believe it's unconstitutional to enforce federal laws that are already on the books. The may try the probable cause route but the law appears to be very well written with that in mind
Click to expand...

To the extent that federal law is considered to "preempt" a certain area of the law, the Supreme Court has held that - based on the Supremacy Clause - state laws with respect to the same are given no effect. However, this will only apply to the extent that the state law is in conflict to federal law. Arizona claims that the law is designed to reinforce federal requirements, so the preemption argument will likely turn on whether it can be shown that the law, in practice, inhibits or interferes with federal administration and enforcement of federal immigration law.
 
#582
#582
paul1454 said:
To the extent that federal law is considered to "preempt" a certain area of the law, the Supreme Court has held that - based on the Supremacy Clause - state laws with respect to the same are given no effect. However, this will only apply to the extent that the state law is in conflict to federal law. Arizona claims that the law is designed to reinforce federal requirements, so the preemption argument will likely turn on whether it can be shown that the law, in practice, inhibits or interferes with federal administration and enforcement of federal immigration law.
Click to expand...

The only problem I see is the federal government is trying to dictate policy on a sovereign state, which has the right to regulate laws within its boundaries. The feds need to stay out of this.


State refers to the set of governing and supportive institutions that have sovereignty over a definite territory and population
 
Last edited:
#583
#583
Funny how people are trotting out all the Nazi references when not too long along using a Nazi reference in political speech was deemed irrational and potentially dangerous.

Oh my.
 
#584
#584
Alexis-Charles-Henri Clerel de Tocqueville was a French politician, sociologist, and historian. He was the author of the first analytical study of the strengths and weaknesses of US society, De la Démocratie en Amérique/Democracy in America (1835). His work is still widely used and studied, by a broad field of academia, even today.

He has some interesting quotes (made some 175 years ago):

Socialism is a new form of slavery.

As for me, I am deeply a democrat; this is why I am in no way a socialist. Democracy and socialism cannot go together. You can't have it both ways.

In no other country in the world is the love of property keener or more alert than in the United States, and nowhere else does the majority display less inclination toward doctrines which in any way threaten the way property is owned.

In other words, a democratic government is the only one in which those who vote for a tax can escape the obligation to pay it.

It is the dissimilarities and inequalities among men which give rise to the notion of honor; as such differences become less, it grows feeble; and when they disappear, it will vanish too.

The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.
 
#585
#585
I know I'm late to the party, but oh well........

I personally think that this bill has the right idea. However, will there be profiling with this. Yea, sure, it happens. Will it be as rampant as some people say? I doubt it.
 
#586
#586
volinbham said:
Funny how people are trotting out all the Nazi references when not too long along using a Nazi reference in political speech was deemed irrational and potentially dangerous.

Oh my.
Click to expand...

Every time we compare something to Hitler or the Nazis, we belittle and minimize how horrible Hitler and the Nazis really were.
 
#587
#587
IPorange said:
Every time we compare something to Hitler or the Nazis, we belittle and minimize how horrible Hitler and the Nazis really were.
Click to expand...

I agree - I just find it ironic that so many were trashing TP folks for rare Hitler references yet the common theme on this immigration issue is its link to Nazism.

The double standard is so tiring.
 
#588
#588
volinbham said:
Funny how people are trotting out all the Nazi references when not too long along using a Nazi reference in political speech was deemed irrational and potentially dangerous.

Oh my.
Click to expand...

almost as egregious is the comparison to the Civil Rights era.
 
#589
#589
MG1968 said:
almost as egregious is the comparison to the Civil Rights era.
Click to expand...

I think it even worse. The people protesting during the civil rights era were doing so for equal protection under the law, maybe they don't realize it but those protesting now are doing so for special treatment and exemptions from our laws.
 
#590
#590
KB5252 said:
I think it even worse. The people protesting during the civil rights era were doing so for equal protection under the law, maybe they don't realize it but those protesting now are doing so for special treatment and exemptions from our laws.
Click to expand...
:yes: Those people may be right, but the comparisons are insulting to struggles the blacks put in.
 
#593
#593
why should a LEGAL hispanic have to prove they're here legally (when they break a law) while other races won't have the same burden when they break a law???

someone please answer that for me. that's the biggest issue i have.
 
#594
#594
Cash Vallin said:
why should a LEGAL hispanic have to prove they're here legally (when they break a law) while other races won't have the same burden when they break a law???

someone please answer that for me. that's the biggest issue i have.
Click to expand...

because it helps identify those who aren't here legally and those who are here illegally are breaking the law and a very expensive nuisance.
 
#595
#595
BigPapaVol said:
because it helps identify those who aren't here legally and those who are here illegally are breaking the law and a very expensive nuisance.
Click to expand...
ok, that's the whole point... you are profiling LEGAL hispanics... Unacceptable... But I thought the bill didn't profile anybody????

Somebody else try.
 
#596
#596
Cash Vallin said:
why should a LEGAL hispanic have to prove they're here legally (when they break a law) while other races won't have the same burden when they break a law???

someone please answer that for me. that's the biggest issue i have.
Click to expand...
First of all, you're the one assuming only Hispanics can be suspected of being an illegal immigrant.

Also, tell me the percentage of illegal immigrants in Arizona that aren't hispanic.
 
#598
#598
Cash Vallin said:
ok, that's the whole point... you are profiling LEGAL hispanics... Unacceptable... But I thought the bill didn't profile anybody????

Somebody else try.
Click to expand...

no I'm not. I'm telling them that if I have reason to stop them, they damn well better be able to prove they're an American, because I now get to ask and am going to.

If providing proper paperwork is an issue, good riddance.
 
#600
#600
tvolsfan said:
First of all, you're the one assuming only Hispanics can be suspected of being an illegal immigrant.

Also, tell me the percentage of illegal immigrants in Arizona that aren't hispanic.
Click to expand...
i'm not assuming that at all... hence the reason i say EVERYBODY should have to go through the process... but we all know that won't happen.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top