E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
It isn't Arizona that's interfering with enforcement of the nation's immigration laws, it's the federal government, the state's lawyers claimed, as a federal judge in Phoenix heard several hours of argument Thursday over a strict new immigration law due to take effect next week.
The Justice Department urged U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton to block the law, arguing that states cannot establish their own immigration policies if they would interfere with federal enforcement of the nation's immigration laws. Arizona's law would divert attention from the federal approach, government lawyers argued, which concentrates on illegal immigrants of greatest concern, such as those who have committed other crimes and constitute a threat to public safety.
In their written briefs, the government's lawyers also argued that the Arizona law would complicate relations with other countries, interfering with foreign policy, a uniquely a federal responsibility. Mexico and several other Central and South American countries filed friend of court briefs opposing the Arizona law.
It requires Arizona police making arrests or traffic stops to check the immigration status of anyone they suspect is in the country illegally. Those arrested could not be released until police verify their immigration status by checking with federal authorities.
Arizona lawyers, in their written submissions, claimed that the state is not acting contrary to federal law and is instead working to pick up the slack resulting from the federal government's limited enforcement of laws passed by Congress.
"Arizona merely seeks to assist with the enforcement of existing federal immigration laws in a constitutional manner," the state argued. It is the federal government, Arizona said, "that is attempting to impose immigration policies and priorities that contravene and conflict with federal law and unambiguous congressional intent."
The judge has not said whether she would issue a ruling before the law takes effect July 29th.
Leave a Comment:
"Washington, D.C. is a sanctuary city where undocumented immigrants from all countries are welcome. The unemployment rate in the District is low. Ask for assistance upon arrival."
Undocumented immigrants are not counted directly in the employment/unemployment statistics. However, legal residents and citizens who are displaced by illegal immigrants are counted. But as illegal immigrants take only low wage, unskill jobs that citizens and legal residents will not take, they will not displace legally employed persons. Of the somewhere between 10,000,000 and 50,000,000 illegal immigrants in the US approximately 3.5 million are farm workers, which until recently was the only kind of work politicians admitted illegal workers are doing. Where are the other millions? Do you know any legal residents or citizens who would do the work now being done by those illegal non-farm workers?
Enjoyed your comment. Unfortunately, the anti-illegal complainers ignore that fact when they talk--faux outrage suits their narrative.
If the federal government politicians could resist the urge to act like children and not think exclusively about how their positions will impact the mid-terms and Latino vote in the out years, we would have reasonable legislation at the federal level. We would not have to litigate a state’s immigration policy.
For another take on the AZ immigration law which is both serious and wicked FUNNY, check out this link:
http://www.dailygoat.com/?p=754
The media really makes my ass tired, the dems will hold their own in November and y'all will have all kinds of phony self examination to do and then carry on with the blame Obama all the time and then have the audacity to ask about race, y'all make me want to puke. I'm watching chuckles right now..puuuuke. Did anybody watch the riechwing side of MSNBC this morning on Sponge Joe and his pal Pukannen the real neo nazi, makes you want to puke in your omlett. The way the gutless media has handled this Shirley issue is mind blowing crap, when is MSNBC going to give the truth telling Media Matters more real air time to counteract the Fox news GOBP TALKING MACHINE?? When are you going to bring back David Shuster you gutless wonders?
It is so easy for those who do not pay for or see the direct results of rampant illegal immigration to say "let's leave them alone or give them a path to citizenship".
I left my native California 23 years ago because I saw the handwriting on the wall there. Now my adopted NC is seeing the same negative effects of illegal aliens...lower wages...juan and juanita have 5 kids in our schools...one of their daughters will get knocked up and get welfare...two of their sons will end up in our jails...juan works part time now so he sure isn't contributing to our nation.
Seal the border with our armed troops if necessary and ship everyone of them we ever catch committing any crime including jaywalking back to their s-hole of a country...maybe they should work on fixing mexicon instead of dragging us down to their level.
Actually the best, easiest, and cheapest way to take care of illegal immigration is to fine the heck out of any employer who hires illegals and make them pay to send each illegal back to their homeland, do the same with any landlord who rents housing to illegals. Get rid of wet foot/dry foot policy, illegal is illegal whether they are from Cuba, Dominican Republic, Haiti, Mexico, Asia, or the Middle East. you won't find one single republican or teabagger who will support that idea though, they want the illeglas here for cheap labor and they do not intend to pay what real American Workers need to live on.
Do you ever question why you are this crazy? "Juan and Juanita" work harder than you do. They get less money than you do. Still you want every one of "them" sent back to their country?
Can the rest of "us" vote whether or not to keep "them" and ship "you" to whatever homogenized country that will have you?
You are a racist.
Yes, we get the Juan and Juanita work so very hard..., and let's not forget that tried and worn out "you are a racist." You and the majority of Americans want this welfare/criminal class that has invaded us OUT.
In 1941 the Supreme Court made a decision in Hines v. Davidowitz, a case involving an alien registration law in Pa. versus a federal law. It ruled that where state's law stands as "an obstacle to the accomplishment of and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress" it must be preempted. "Whatever power a State may have to restrict, limit, regulate, and register aliens as a distinct group is subject to the national legislative and treaty making powers." They held that the state system was superseded by the federal system. See Wikapaedia. This is a precedent setting case.
First, then, clarification is needed as to the full purpose and objective of Congress. Is the purpose of Congress to ignore the current federal law, to look the other way when the current federal law is broken, and is the objective of Congress to allow illegal aliens to run amok with no recourse? If so, then, the Hines v. Davidowitz ruling may be the precedent that shoots the Arizona law down.
The ruling also states:
"When the national government by treaty or statute has established rules and regulations touching the rights, privileges, obligations or burdens of aliens as such, the treaty or statute is the supreme law of the land. No state can add to or take from the force and effect of such treaty or statute, ....."
The national government has established rules and regulations. No state can add or take from. I believe the Arizona law was specifically written to mirror the federal law. I believe the only difference is that Arizona intends to enforce it.
And the rules and regulations address rights of aliens (doesn't say illegal aliens), and obligations and burdens. Wouldn't one of those obligations or burdens imposed on the aliens be to abide by the national law ---by not entering the country illegally? Would the fact the aliens, themselves, are adding or taking from the force and effect of the treaty, nullify their protection?
It will be interesting to see if this case is cited in the judgment.
Immigration just won't go away. Immigration is a foreign invasion reshaping the western hemisphere. In the last 50 years, millions of people from the Third World have moved into the Western democracies. Many have contributed to the welfare of these nations.
Others lack work skills, proper education and democratic convictions. What will it mean when these ever growing minorities begin to constitute the majority? Majorities are becoming minorities in their own land. Peoples are feeling increasingly threatened by the changing demographics in their own states.
The ethnic composition of America is rapidly altering due to massive immigration in the last few decades. The United States alone took in 10 million more immigrants in the seven years following Sept 11, 2001. Many of them from countries rife with radical Islamists.
Americans are very aware that demographic changes will lead to a majority nonwhite population in their own lifetimes. America had an immigration policy prior to 1965 that favored maintaining the racial statous quo. A 1965 immigration Bill deliberately changed earlier policy.
The 1965 Bill welcomed a huge influx of immigrants from the worlds poorer nations. Americans were assured it would not alter the ethnic mix and social fabric of their nation. They were assured that all would be safe. It's now evident this assurance was false.
John Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies professor Fouad Ajami wrote on May 10, 2010 in the Wall Street Journal, "A Muslim has no nationality except his belief, the intellectual godfather of the Islamists, Egyptain Sayyid Qutb, wrote decades ago, Qutb's children are everywhere now, they carry the nationalities of foreign lands and plot against them".
Pakistani born Faisal Shahzad who set up the New York car bomb is a devotee of Sayyid Qutb's doctrine, and Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the Fort Hood shooter, was another devotee. Qutb was executed by secular dictator Gamal Abdel Nasser but his thoughts and legacy endure.
Globalization, the shaking up of continents, the ease of travel, and the doors for immigration flung wide open have given Qutb's worldview greater power and relevance. The Islamists are now within the gates. they fled the fires and the failures of the Islamic world but brought the ruin with them. They mock national borders and identities.
The economy plays a serious role in immigration. There will be and has been serious consequences for the native peoples as a direct result of immigration. The strangers of foreign cultures will end up on top in control and in time possibly dictating a way of life foreign to the American peoples.
That is exactly what happened when European settlers started arriving in North America and elsewhere. They ended up on top and in control, displacing the native populations. Two or three centuries later, they are the ones losing control to newer arrivals. We've almost come full circle.
Immigration trends and birthrates show that sometime in this century the peoples of America will be minorities in their own land. Significant change is underway and it's threatening no less than the future of Western civilization. America so often called the free world, is under siege from illegal immigrants and activists.
Many will say "that is America for you", the land where you have the freedom to think what you wish. The question should be, how much longer will this land be your land? When will we become a minority that slowly fades away giving way to another and different land consisting of a different majority?
In short, does a country have a right to maintain its cultural identity. This is a unique question for the United States since it is a nation of immigrants. So its cultural identity is a mixture of many cultures that celebrate their roots but come together as Americans. When the number of immigrants from a particular culture is very large you have disruption and you have resentment.
However, I think the country can assimilate this latest wave. Children of Mexicans will speak english and grow up as Americans.
Airborne, I hope this happens very, very soon.
All I know is when I went to mexico I had to stop and have my bags and Id checked when I was walking out. if they can ck us we should do the same. if the goverment dont do thier job I have no problem with arizona makeing sure thier citizens are safe.
its 2 years in prison in Mexico if you fail to provide proof of citizenship. It should be the same in America.
I've never had anything checked when I went to Mexico (Canada however is another story, they have been checking everything that comes into their country for over 30 years that I personally am familiar with - yep personal experience with them that date back at least that long), however, returning home to Tennessee proved to be quite different, everything I had with me on each trip is thoroughly examined.
Union Baby, You have never had anything checked because airborne and carlyssman are lying. I'm tired of trying to be polite: Lies are lies and folks like these are making stuff up to try to justify their hatred and fear, plain and simple.
calicucu....
Do you have one iota of proof that I'm lying? I challenge you to produce it. I challenge you to read and discuss the present laws in Mexico.
You should have no problem producing the laws on immigration in Mexico if I am lying. Or can you produce them? I don't think you will do so because it would prove you are the one LYING.
Goodday
to calicucass .only the demowits lies to sell an agenda, your just upset that your precious lord and savior obuma is dieing in the poles along with his party that you have to call us liars just to ease your small brain. we cant even go to mexico without the poss. of being shot or robbed but yet your annointed one wants to blaim arizona for protecting itself because this party sure isn;t doing a thing.
oh air-b sounds like the same old GOP scare tactics!
scare tactics. Read america history. You can prove it incorrect.
I wish i could but the r-wing, religious nut -jobs in TEXAS edacational system rewrote the history books??
Would you like to borrow some history books since you wail that the Repubs have rewritten them?
Do one better, take the time to talk to your elders that knew and learned from the history books of the past. You'd be surprised or mad at what they know and remember.
It would be a lesson like none you have ever experienced.
The federal government is responsible for immigration, we all agree, however what does that entail. To be it means the feds are responsible to issue visas, set quotas as to how many aliens can be admitted from any one country, establishment test for legal aliens to get US citizenship, issue legal residence ID cards, To regulate work visas, student visas, etc., No where have I found that only the federal government has the right to arrest and detail illegal aliens in the constitution or in any court proceedings. There are a few involving legal aliens but none for illegal aliens. The judge should uphold AZ and let the law take effect then if some one is held because of lack of legal documentation then let a court case be filed. How can you invalidate a law because IT MIGHT violation someones rights.
If you invade a country you have no rights, illegal is illegal. The cost of the illegal population is astronomical and must be STOPPED! The Federal government is not paying the cost of this invasion, the states and the citizens of this country are! The education standards are dismal,the crime rate has escalated, the hostility between the legals and illegals is on the verge of hostility, and yet the so called president does nothing. Is it because he needs the mexican vote? It sure is. obama would sell his mother for a vote and nothing but his ego matters. However if you look at the last names of the people who are most against Arizona's law and the Governors stand to protect her citizens and the United States you will find they are of mexican origin. Need more be said? America wake up!!!
Tell us amvet, why Ronald Reagan gave amnesty to millions of illegals? Do you want to pay $10 a head for iceberg lettuce? How about $15 for a small box of strawberries? How do you know someone is here illegally? Is it because he looks like one of "them". I have seen no problems between legal and illegal aliens, perhaps where you live it is different but here in a border state I am seeing none of it. Most of those arrested in our community and surrounding areas are US citizens born and reared here. Neither legal nor illegal aliens get into as much trouble as some born here.
I know the answer to that one adler Because there was a promiss by the then administration to wall our boarder and except no more illegals.
Adler,
I will pay whatever price the market sets based on supply and demand and if the price is too high simply go without. I would like to see anyone doing the hard work to harvest these crops paid a decent wage. If only the immigrants will do this type of work, and there are not enough, then lets give out more work visas or increase legal immigration.
How does the federal law deal with this? It is also a case of "looks like" and "sounds like". When you are dealing with illegal immigrants those characteristics that make up that group is what one uses to identify that group. Yes, this is a burden for those citizens that are brown. Even if not in actual practice, just the idea that they will be singled out. But there is no getting around it unless we decide to change the law and not enforce immigration rules or simply ignore the laws on the books. How can you apply a law, and I am talking about the federal law, that by its very nature targets people of a certain ethnic group?
There really is not a good comparison or analogy to this type of law.
Where were they 5 years ago? 3 years ago, 10 years ago? Regardless of whether the federal government chooses to enforce the immigration laws or not a single state does not have the right to do it on their own. Could you imagine the mess with 50 states each having different immigration laws. Someone legal in Illinois could be arrested in Alabama because their laws would be different. New York may have more lenient laws than Texas and so New York aliens (who may be legal there ) could have trouble if they crossed the Texas border. What a mess we would have.
In that case a single state should also not have the right to become a sancturary state.
The following senators voted against making English the official language of America :
Akaka (D-HI) Bayh (D-IN)
Biden (D-DE) Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA) Cantwell (D-WA)
Clinton (D-NY) Dayton (D-MN)
Dodd (D-CT) Domenici (R-NM)
Durbin (D-IL) Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA) Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI) Jeffords (I-VT)
Kennedy (D-MA) Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI) Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT) Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD) Murray (D-WA)
Obama (D-IL) Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV) Salazar (D-CO)
Sarbanes (D-MD) Schumer (D-NY)
Stabenow (D-MI) Wyden (D-OR)
Now, the following are the senators who voted to give illegal aliens Social Security benefits.
They are grouped by home state. If a state is not listed, there was no voting representative.
Alaska : Stevens (R)
Arizona : McCain (R)
Arkansas : Lincoln (D) Pryor (D) California : Boxer (D) Feinstein (D) Colorado : Salazar (D)
Connecticut : Dodd (D) Lieberman (D) Delaware : Biden (D) Carper (D) Florida : Martinez (R)
Hawaii : Akaka (D) Inouye (D) Illinois : Durbin (D) Obama (D) Indiana : Bayh (D) Lugar (R) Iowa : Harkin (D)
Kansas: Brownback (R)
Louisiana: Landrieu (D)
Maryland: Mikulski (D) Sarbanes (D) Massachusetts : Kennedy (D) Kerry (D)
Montana: Baucus (D)
Nebraska: Hagel (R)
Nevada: Reid (D)
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D) Menendez (D)
New Mexico: Bingaman (D)
New York: Clinton (D) Schumer (D)
North Dakota : Dorgan (D)
Ohio : DeWine (R) Voinovich(R) Oregon : Wyden (D)
Pennsylvania : Specter (D)
Rhode Island : Chafee (R) Reed (D)
South Carolina : Graham (R)
South Dakota : Johnson (D)
Vermont : Jeffords (I) Leahy (D) Washington : Cantwell (D) Murray (D)
West Virginia : Rockefeller (D)
Wisconsin : Feingold (D) Kohl (D)
THE ENTIRE POPULATION OF THE UNITED STATES NEEDS TO KNOW THIS INFORMATION - UNLESS THEY DON'T MIND SHARING THEIR SOCIAL SECURITY WITH FOREIGN WORKERS WHO DIDN'T PAY A DIME INTO IT! - MUSLIMS TAKING OVER - HIGHER AND HIGHER TAXES - BABY KILLING - DENIAL OF MEDICAL TREATMENT FOR SENIORS GUN CONFISCATION - SUPER RIGHTS FOR HOMOSEXUALS - CONFISCATION OF YOUR RETIREMENT ACCOUNTS AND REALESTATE - SOCIALISM OR COMMUNISM ABOLISHING THE CONSTUTION ENTIRELY - AND MORE
Don’t forget November 2!
“Take Out the Trash Day”
These posts get crazier and meaner by the minute, eh? Super rights for homosexuals? They can't even get married or serve openly in the military! The confiscation of your retirement came at the hands of Rep. deregulation. I could strike down this line by line but its just a mean spirited rant, so what would be the point? My question to excaliburgc is what group of people DO you like since it's not foreign workers, gays or Muslims?
Spread the FEAR !!!!! Be afraid be very afraid
Fear and lies:
20% of the senators listed are either no longer in the Senate or are not running for re-election.
Muslims taking over – right, they are less than 1% of the population
Federal payroll taxes are at their lowest level since 1950
No seniors are being denied medical care
No one is taking your guns – Fewer restrictions are now in effect
Equal rights for LGBT’s not excessive – and they still have fewer rights
Just bigoted lies from a super bigot
On what day have the democrats ever put the good of this country first. The fact that 25% of the people in this country joined tea parties says never. Keep up the good work it could be 50% in another year.
Where did you pull 25% from? A total fabrication.
This is not a formal Party so there are no official numbers. However it is estimated that approximately 4% of registered voters identify themselves as Tea Party members. Since registered voters are only about half of the population so you are only off by a factor of 10.
They are 2.5% of the population.
Immigration as a global problem being experienced by all countries in the world need to be handled with a lot of care, civility and maturity. America as the leader of the civilized world must always be seen to be above all other countries in the world as to how they handle this global problem at the watch of the entire world or international community.
How a country handles immigration problem is what matters and not the problem itself because all countries in the world including Somalia, Rwanda, Sudan, Burundi just to mention a few experience this same problem of illegal immigration and border control. In Somali, illegal immigrants are killed whenever they are caught or arrested by Somalians. In Uganda, the former dictator Idi Amin gave all of them 48 hours to leave the country and those who failed to beat that deadline were rounded up and killed. In South Africa, they are stoned by mob justice whenever members of public discover them. Saddam Hussein persecuted those he believed were illegal immigrants among other reasons why America went after him.
Illegal immigration was one of Adolf Hitler's major domestic problems and his solution to it was to enact very harsh and cruel immigration laws that warranted the Jews illegal immigrants to be put in concentration camps with the objective of bringing them to extinction.
It took the wise leadership of America among other right thinking leaders of the world to stop Hitler from continuing to apply his inhuman and cruel anti immigration laws against the Jews immigrants. According to Hitler, he was just doing the right thing by securing his borders and protecting his people against illegal immigrants, majority of whom were the Jews.Thousands of American soldiers lost their lives fighting Hitler and his inhuman laws in Germany.
It is the Federal government's responsibility as the leader of the free and civilized world to ensure that no leader in any country or any part of the world persecutes the people living within his country whether they are citizens, legal or illegal immigrants.
America has always exercised this responsibility by leading by example. It will be very difficult for the Federal government to exercise this noble responsibility if the Federal government would allow any of its states such as Arizona to embarrass America by enacting such laws that America has boldly fought against in other countries.
United States must not allow itself to use the same methods that are being used in other third world countries including even those that are regarded as failed states to tackle its immigration problems and not even a single state such as Arizona should be allowed to embarrass this great country in the world by coming up with laws that will leave international community wondering whether Arizona is part of the great America they know of or part of Sudan or Somalia where such laws are arbitrarily applied.
Excellent Sam, and as I stated in an earlier post - there is one simple solution to all of this, unfortuantely all the teabaggers and republicans do is yell and look stupid, instead if they would make the sacrifice to do without cheap illegal labor then the illegals just might not have a reason to come here. Punish those who make it desirable for illegals to come, nothing else has worked so far, this is a very cheap way to control illegal immigration - and my government can actually make some money from the fines and it won't cost the tax payer one cent to see the illegals returned home.
I think that the problem with your solution, UB, is that these people are NOT working in the accounting department, they're not doing tech support, they're not building automobiles, they're not designing buildings, they are not electrical contractors in public buildings. What they are doing is lugging 90 lb bundles of shingles up a ladder in 95 degree heat, standing in hot, smelly factories preparing chickens for packaging and sale, bent over in fields picking lettuce and tomatoes, spreading bales of pine straw and mulch. The unemployed banker, the furloughed teacher, the former GM line worker are probably not going to take these jobs. You could probably fill some of them with younger workers for two or three times the current hourly rate, but there will be a lot of work left undone because there won't be people to do it and what is done is going to cost you and me a lot more. Those businesses that rely on these workers would close down or, if they are able, move to someplace else. All that irrigated land in the San Joaquin Valley will return to desert as the farmers can't harvest what they grow, so they'll move to Mexico, irrigate the land around Monterrey, employ the same workers and we end up importing a lot of our food instead of producing it here and paying more for the privilege. Those businesses that can't move will just shrink dramatically or go away completely. The true cost of new home construction will rise dramatically and even in a robust housing market the number of housing starts will be severely limited just by the lack of labor resources. etc, etc.
None of this is to say that there isn't a problem to be dealt with here. It is merely to say that any apparently simple solution, no matter what it is, will create as many problems as it solves. I must add, however, that I don't understand why the 'free-market' conservatives on this blog don't wholeheartedly endorse this as the ultimate application of their philosophy - people who will choose to work, and work hard, for whatever the business owner will pay. Businesses that are unfettered by government regulation as to who they can hire and what they can pay them, with no racial or gender quotas involved and no threat of unionization by the employees. Wise businessmen who have found a way to minimize costs, maximize profit while delivering goods and services at a price that meets market acceptance. You guys should see this as a capitalist nirvana. For those with a more progressive philosophy, these folks represent the true American story. These are people who endure hardship and rejection all for a chance to better themselves and the lives of their families. And all of this while we get to be true to those great words on the Statue of Liberty - 'Give us your poor..." This is truly a win, win, win opportunity here.
Sam, the AZ law simply mirrors the federal law. There is certainly no drastic difference. Persecute ? What, are you saying the AZ law is akin to Nazi germany trying to exterminate the Jews? Don't you think that's a little over the top?
Ron,
Fine, great. They want the American dream. So allow in more legal immigrants. But as a progressive you should be fair about this. Should we up the immigration quota for all countries, not just Mexico?
It seems the basic argument is that we do not need any stricter border enforcement and we should not hassle those in this country illegally because they are simply trying to make a better life for themselves. If that is your belief, and I would not call it right or wrong - simply a belief - then let's change the federal laws regarding immigration. Use our democratic process and have our elected officials change the law.
Let's cut the bull and get down to it. Force our elected officials to step up to the plate and make a decision.
My state is ultra serious about seat belt laws - "Click it or Ticket" - we're not fing around" is there slogan. I guess it is a more serious offense to not wear your seat belt - as motorcyles with helmetless drivers wiz by - than to illegally enter the country. I could just see the uproar if their new ads proclaimed - "Passport or Deport - We're getting serious about immigration law".
The question is very simple. Do you want to allow more legal immigration or not. That's it. Otherwise the federal government is obliged to enforce the laws of the land. And personally, I could live with much higher quotas of legal immigration as I have no ax to grind against Mexicans looking for a better life. It would be much better for those immigrants and it would most likely mean they would get higher wages. But let's do this in the open and legally and stop the wink and a nod attitude toward the laws. We owe this much to the current citizens of this country.
Rick,
The answer may be higher quotas, or guest workers, or some combination. I do find your correlation between the enforcement of seat belt laws and immigration laws interesting - it does seem out of balance. I think it just speaks to how complex an issue this is. My point, when boiled down, is that the answer isn't easy either financially, legally or politically - probably politically most of all. There will be good and bad consequences of any action, many of which are unclear. That is what is causing the difficulty and delay in reaching any decision.
Ron,
There can be no argument that the answer is not easy. Unfortunately when the problems are difficult the legislature passes the buck to the executive and the judicial branches. Perhaps when the mid term elections are over they can do what they were sent there to do. Not to decide is to decide.
It is sad to see the way that fear mongering is being used in this debate. I and my people are being scape-goated because you all need some one to blame; plain and simple. The reality is that yes, a lot of us do the jobs you don't want to do. No, you are not willing to pay $10.00 for a head of lettuce. Yes, part of keeping the prices reasonable is paying illegal immigrants far below minimum wage for their labor. These are all truths.
Nobody wants to talk about this: But you are couching your racism in "Protect our Borders" faux-patriotism. If you hate Hispanics, just say so.
calicucu..
The debate about illegal immigration has nothing to do with fear mongering, your people being scape-goat-ed, a head of lettuce and the price of it, nor blaming any person for anything.
This debate is about the Law and the letter of the Law. I gather you are Mexican since you mention "my people being scape-goat-ed". I appreciate your heritage and I would expect you to appreciate my heritage.
It is very clear you do not respect my heritage. I wrote that the Europeans coming to America wiped out the then native peoples of America. I added that illegal immigration is a way of wiping out the prior Europeans that settled here.
You responded by saying "Airborne, I can't wait or will be happy when that happens. You use the words fear mongering, scare tactics, and etc but yet you feel you are justified in saying you can't wait until the Europeans are wiped out.
You have a double standard yet believe only in the one you wish. It's that simple. You said, I was lying about the laws passed by the government of Mexico. I challenged you to prove that I was lying. You have miserably fail to do so.
"Reglamento de la Ley General de Poblacion" was enacted in Mexico in April 2000. Ten full years before the State of AR enacted an immigration law to cope with illegal immigrants. "Reglamento de la Ley General de Poblacion clearly states",
Illegal Immigration is a Felony, punishable by up to two years in prison. Illegal immigrants deported and who attempt to re-enter Mexico can be imprisoned for ten years. Visa violators can be sentenced to six-year terms. Mexicans who help illegal immigrants are considered criminals.
Mexico can deport foreigners who are deemed detrimental to economic or national interests, violate Mexican law, are not physically or mentally healthy OR lack necessary funds for their sustenance and for their dependents.
I encourage you to read Reglamento de la Ley General de Poblacion as it is written in your own language. I've given it to you in the English translation. I speak and read both.
http://www.washingtontimes.com.
Reglamento de la Ley General de Poblacion enacted in April 2000 by the Mexicon Government sounds like the kind of law that any rational nation or state would have to protect itself from illegal immigrants. Reglamento de la Ley General de Poblacion is not fear mongering.
It does not scape goat any one or any peoples. It is the law as Mexico has the right to enact. AR has the right to enact a law that protects it from illegal immigrants just as Mexico had the right in April 2000. That is reality.
IT all political!I live in AZ ,and Brewer,McCain,Hayworth all have LIED! about your boarder towns being unsafe.Many law eforcement offical in are boarder towns have said things have never been safer,and our local madia reported we have'nt been this safe in 50 years.I being a white boy have worked with illegal immigrants most of my life,and they are some of the finest HUMAN BEING i have ever met.
Read Reglamento de la Ley General de Poblacion enacted by the government of Mexico in April 2000. You may then understand that it's not all political bull in AR.
You should understand that if the Mexican government had the right to enact a strict illegal immigration law so does the state of AR including every state in America.
The one huge difference is Mexico enforces the law it enacted. Not because it is fear mongering nor scare tactics. It is enforced because it is the LAW.
America due to sympathizers has become so soft it doesn't understand how or is politically afraid to enforce the laws of America.
OH yeah Mexico is doing a great enforcing its laws,that why the cartels are running the country.
a-born it AZ not AR but its starting to look like AR 50 year ago!
We could have stopped all this immigration turmoil, demonstrations in Arizona, enforcement in Fremont Nebraska and across the country? If Sen. Harry Reid hadn't stuck his dirty fingers in the pie and reduced the empowerment of E-Verify. Almost everybody discerns that E-verify can isolate the majority of illegal labor taking American jobs. That Harry Reid in his Democratic leadership was able to sojourn E-Verify as a permanent tool of Homeland Security. In fact in his gratitude to special interest groups, he nearly--KILLED--E-Verify for his business friends in 2009. If it had not been for Senator Jeff Sessions we wouldn't even have this tool to struggle the unceasing invasion from across the border. With no thanks to Reid, E-Verify that has grown in intensity and being taken up by hundreds of thousands of dedicated businesses. We should congratulate Sen. Sessions, although even though E-Verify was weakened--as its not mandated, it still is turning illegal aliens away from jobs and opening new hires for citizens and legal residents.
Illegal Immigrants would start departing from sovereign America, if E-Verify was mandated with the full funding. Politicians are clueless that no money would be appropriated as these illegal residents would leave by their own accord. THEY WOULD SELF-DEPORT THEMSELVES.
The estimate of illegals still having employment is around 8.5 million. Somehow E-Verification has survived the barrage from different pro-open borders, pro-amnesty organizations, which have convinced themselves that the enforcement program E-Verify isn't accurate. One things for sure unless you have heavy gauge identification documents, E-Verify will recognize your deliberate fraudulent documents and identify the irregularity. After being hired, you have one choice to approach the Social Security office, so they can approve your right to work. If any state needs to mandate E-Verify--it’s Nevada, for its large population of illegal alien workers and families who have settled there.
Nevada also has suffered from its politicians, governors, mayors who have made no apology in serving illegal aliens with citizen-residents welfare programs. Just like various other states many cities such as San Francisco and Los Angeles ensure safe harbors for illegal aliens, who have crippled the public entitlement programs nationwide. Senator Reid has also colluded with his Liberal Democratic minions to press the Congress for Amnesty. Other than E-Verify, American immigration law is limited to the local policing authority 287 (g) to question people of their legal status. The 2006 Secure Fence act was dismantled to just one fence and even that stands in many places vented for criminals and illegal immigrants to pour through. AMERICANS MUST HAVE THE DESIRE TO REMOVE FROM OFFICE ALL PRO-ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT LAWMAKERS BY PRESSING THEM AT WASHINGTON SWITCHBOARD 202-224-3121.
No copyright on my articles or comments