Roberts leads the defeat of most of Arizona Immigration Law

Howey said:
This whole State's Rights thing is silly. We're called the United States, not the Separate States. Sheesh...
Click to expand...

Pesky constitution allowing that States have powers... We should just get rid of those pesky things, you know the Constitution and those States things... They just get in the way of the dictators in chief we elect for life and stuff...
 
Jarod said:
Thats a very interesting, and capricous reading of the opinion. Not true, but interesting. Three Provisions were preempted because they are not a State Power when the Feds choose to do it there way, or enforce, or not enforce there own rules. If the feds choose, and they have, they can tell Arazona to stay out of it. The S. Ct. said the State has no right to take such action when the Fed is doing it there way! Even if Arazona does not like the way the Feds are doing it.

The part that was upheld was not even clearly upheld, the court acknoldged that status checks on there face may be Constitutional but questioned if they can be applied in a Constitutional way thus let the law stand and allowed review of individual cases at the lower level.

Roberts sided with the correct side on this !
Click to expand...

Well, while you think you came out ahead on this; let me ask you a question.
What do you think is going to happen when the car of an illegal is stopped and he has no valid drivers license?
I'll help you.
It's going to be impounded and he's going to probably go to jail.
Then when he gets out, he's going to have to go to court and if he doesn't, well then he'll have a warrent issued for his arrest.
And if he does this again and gets stopped, then he'll be classified as habitual and spend longer in jail.
So you go ahead and try to gloat, thinking that the hands of the AZ law enforcement are tied; but don't cry to hard when the illegals continue to leave and return to mexico.

I'll let you figure out what to do about the part that you can't even get insurance, without a valid drivers license and no registration without insurance. :D
 
Last edited:
Socrtease said:
I think that Arizona, like New Mexico, is inundated with illegals. If the federal government is not going to act then yes, I think the states should have the right to deal with the problem. HOWEVER, I believe that much of the Arizona law was based more on xenophobia than on really dealing with the issues. It gave cops way to much leeway to decide who and for what reasons they could hold people. To hold ANYONE inside the borders of the US the police MUST have probable cause. The Arizona law didn't provide the kind of protections that our Constitution requires.
Click to expand...

Could you provide something substantial, to hold up your assertions of:
1 - way to much leeway
2 - reasons the could hold people
3 - why being illegal isn't probable cause
 
Jarod said:
I think the State is not allowed and should not be allowed to pre-empt the Feds when they choose a policy relating to immigration, even if the State does not like it.
Click to expand...

How is a State upholding a Federal law, pre-empting the feds?
<this should be interesting>
 
Damocles said:
Pesky constitution allowing that States have powers... We should just get rid of those pesky things, you know the Constitution and those States things... They just get in the way of the dictators in chief we elect for life and stuff...
Click to expand...

What many conservatives do not understand is that the 10th amendment works in conjunction with the 9th.

States have powers.... AND the Federal Government has powers. Controlling immigration is a FEDERAL power.
 
Socrtease said:
Really? Is that what your limited intellectual ability gets from all this. Basically the court said what MOST people said. The state was interfering in Federal jurisdiction.
Click to expand...
The state was simply trying to uphold the US Constitution. Why is the Federal Government having such trouble doing this?
 
Granule said:
The state was simply trying to uphold the US Constitution. Why is the Federal Government having such trouble doing this?
Click to expand...

Because on that issue, its not the States right to do so! According to the US Constitution.
 
So the State has no right to enforce the federal law within its borders.......really ?......

Is that what you're telling us....???


States do not have the right to enforce The Federal Civil Rights Statutes ?
The States have no right to enforce The Federal Laws against Child Labor ?
etc.....
 
Last edited:
bravo said:
So the State has no right to enforce the federal law within its borders.......really ?......

Is that what you're telling us....???
Click to expand...

Correct, Not unless the Federal Government grants them that authority.
 
Jarod said:
Correct, Not unless the Federal Government grants them that authority.
Click to expand...


States do not have the right to enforce The Federal Civil Rights Statutes ?
The States have no right to enforce The Federal Laws against Child Labor ?
etc.....

They can stop enforcing these provisions any time they see fit....is that right ?

Utah can ignore the federal laws against bigamy and let the LDS enjoy themselves ?

California can ignore the federal laws against any and all drugs if they want to ?

the list is endless.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top