Soooo....lemme get this straight. The FEDS won't enforce a FEDERAL law, so the state takes matter into their own hands to do the job for the FEDS. Then a FEDERAL judge blocks the law. Wow.
that required officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws.
Legally, the two are not the same.police are prevented from questioning people's immigration status if there is reason to believe they are in the country illegally.
I have seen the wording, and the majority of the time, I have seen this wording:
From this wording, I would take it that an officer is not required, but may do so if they wish. CNN has a different wording though:
Legally, the two are not the same.
The part that went into effect will still make Az less desirable to illegals.
The first few posters say this ruling is good, and expected. But this law is worded very closely to the Federal immigration laws, so how can it be in question if Nationally it is accepted, but in the state law its illegal?
Anything not covered specifically by the Constitution is a state right. There are parts of immigration in the constitution, but nothing limits immigration control as a federal control, and even more if the federal goverment isn't doing what is suppose to do, then the states must step up and enforce the laws.
I agree, lets stop fighting about Arizona's law, and force the feds to enforce the laws. It would be cheaper all around. But the current administration still has the hopes of signing millions of new liberals into citizenship. They love the lesser citizen, the ones that get paid a percentage of minimum wage, no benefits, and no employment protections that every citizen is guaranteed. They love the underground work force.
Illegals are bankrupting the border states, and the problem is expanding quickly to all states. If the federal goverment doesn't act, then every state will have to pass this kind of law.(and many are considering it.)
You can not tax the working citizens and then give away a large percentage to people that are not our citizens for very long before the state goes bankrupt. This is basically giving money to one beggar, which leads to twenty or thirty beggars to swarm in. States give welfare to illegals, so more illegals flow in. Money for nothing, when they slave at jobs in Mexico for pennies.
In the end, I believe the courts will side with Arizona on the majority of this bill, if not all of it. I do believe the governor is right, it will go to the supreme court, and I believe it will be 5-4
Did you read the law? While it claims to represent Federal law it really goes beyond that. This all needs to be worked out in the court system because there are other states that want to use this law for a model. Arizona is as good of a place to work it all out as anywhere else. I can not stress enough that people need to read the law before they comment on it.Soooo....lemme get this straight. The FEDS won't enforce a FEDERAL law, so the state takes matter into their own hands to do the job for the FEDS. Then a FEDERAL judge blocks the law. Wow.
I read every word of it, which is more than I can say for 99% of those against it. Most of what people are protesting doesn't even exist in the text.Did you read the law? While it claims to represent Federal law it really goes beyond that. This all needs to be worked out in the court system because there are other states that want to use this law for a model. Arizona is as good of a place to work it all out as anywhere else. I can not stress enough that people need to read the law before they comment on it.
CNN news
“Other parts of the law will go into effect Thursday as passed. This includes a ban on so-called sanctuary cities, and the criminalization of hiring day laborers who are in the country illegally. The parts of the law dealing with sanctions for employers who hire illegal immigrants also withstood the first legal test.”
There are three issues that will determine the 2012 elections. They are
1 Economy
2 War
3 Immigrations issues
Obama will lose votes, from those that voted for him in 2008, including myself, on the immigration issue. If he does real well on the economy and war he may still get elected. If he does poorly on either the war or economy he will loose.
Arizona has a serious problem with illegals coming into the state. Arizona is trying to do something to protect the citizens in Arizona and the lawmakers of the immigration laws are receiving more than 70% of the voters support. Polls also show that over 60% of the nation is in support of Arizona.
Quote by The Lady Kate
One of the things I noticed was: "U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton also struck down the section of law that makes it a crime not to carry immigration registration papers."
Now, correct me if I'm wrong here, but given that a US citizen has no such papers, what's to stop an illegal from simply claiming citizenship, saying something like, "Sorry, I left my wallet at home," to get around this?
You are right on Kate!
There is nothing to stop the illegal from saying "Sorry, I left my wallet at home”.
When I go to cash a check, use a credit card, get on the airplane, come to the USA from visiting Mexico, rent a car, etc I have to show ID. In the case of my returning from Mexico to buy drugs from the pharmacy I have to prove to the officials that I am a citizen. I have absolutely no problem with that at all.
Now suppose you're not going to cash a check, get on an airplane, or to the pharmacy. When you're hanging out outside your neighbor's house, drinking Pepsi and talking about last night's football game, you have to prove to the officials... no, wait, that's not right, is it?
It sure gets old hearing people cry about the Arizona law that requires you to carry papers when you violate the law. I did not violate any law and I have to show my proof of citizenship to the U.S. authorities every time I come back from Mexico.
but not every time you go out in public, do you?
If at any given moment while I'm out and about, I could be accosted by the police on some flimsy pretext of being an illegal seeking work, and be required to prove my citizenship to the officer's satisfaction, that might be a bit of an issue, now wouldn't it?