Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Governor just signed the immigration bill!!!

YES!

If the federal government won't close our borders then we need states like Arizona to ENFORCE the LAWS!

I wonder if AZ's kid was one of the students that walked out of school today to "protest" on the nice sunny day?

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:Governor just signed the immigration bill!!!

YES!

If the federal government won't close our borders then we need states like Arizona to ENFORCE the LAWS!

Link:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... id=topnews" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I like the sound of this: But is that how it'll work..?
"Illegal is illegal," said Pearce, a driving force on the issue in Arizona. "We'll have less crime. We'll have lower taxes. We'll have safer neighborhoods. We'll have shorter lines in the emergency rooms. We'll have smaller classrooms."

I didn't know if I should laugh or cry this afternoon when I heard a radio report on the passage of this bill...

President Obama was critical of the law, saying it threatens to "undermine basic notions of fairness that we cherish as Americans, as well as the trust between police and our communities..."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... TopStories" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Can someone explain how police, protecting the citizens of their communities, will undermine the basic notion of fairness???

Laws are not fair....laws must be constitutional...here we have another example of "feelings" ruling the president, rather than application of law...

The only thing unfair about laws is inconsistent application...

Fucking morons.

Yeah its so fu*ked that Arizona politicians do what over 70% of their constituiants want them to do AND enforce the LAW!

What a bunch of REAL patriots

I'd be staying away from Arizona if I had brown skin.

What identification is sufficient? Driver's license? Passport? Birth Certificate? vault copy of birth certificate ( )?

This won't stand long constitutionally, imo.

What do the civil libertarians have to say on this?

A feel-good law, much like gun control and some environmental laws.

despite whatever merits immigration enforcement may have, I'm not sure this will stand.

Immigration is unquestionably a Federal issue.

Thus its the Fed's sole responsibility to pass laws regarding immigration and to either enforce those laws or delegate those enforcement responsibilities to the states.

The Feds haven't delegated any authority. Arizona has decided to do it on their own. They should be working with the Federal government to get some of those powers delegated (e.g., deputizing local police as Dept. of Homeland Security agents, etc...)

I don't really have skin in this fist fight... so I'm curious
Is the fear police having carte blanche..?

Because I can assure you the Nation will be watching and if the overwhelming perception is this works, TEXAS is less than 12 months behind...

danefan wrote:despite whatever merits immigration enforcement may have, I'm not sure this will stand.

Immigration is unquestionably a Federal issue.

Thus its the Fed's sole responsibility to pass laws regarding immigration and to either enforce those laws or delegate those enforcement responsibilities to the states.

The Feds haven't delegated any authority. Arizona has decided to do it on their own. They should be working with the Federal government to get some of those powers delegated (e.g., deputizing local police as Dept. of Homeland Security agents, etc...)

But aren't there already Federal laws in place that are not being enforced? Couldn't it be argued that the local folks are enforcing these laws as well as their own for the protection that the Federal government can't provide efficiently?

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:

danefan wrote:despite whatever merits immigration enforcement may have, I'm not sure this will stand.

Immigration is unquestionably a Federal issue.

Thus its the Fed's sole responsibility to pass laws regarding immigration and to either enforce those laws or delegate those enforcement responsibilities to the states.

The Feds haven't delegated any authority. Arizona has decided to do it on their own. They should be working with the Federal government to get some of those powers delegated (e.g., deputizing local police as Dept. of Homeland Security agents, etc...)

But aren't there already Federal laws in place that are not being enforced? Couldn't it be argued that the local folks are enforcing these laws as well as their own for the protection that the Federal government can't provide efficiently?

Yes, but that doesn't give the local authorities the right to enforce federal laws without delegation of those duties. Federal laws like this are federal for a reason - consistency across all States. Allowing states to enforce federal laws without specific oversight and delegation could lead to some very different applications of the law.

Plus, I'd like to just point out that these criminals are illegally entering the United States, not Arizona. Arizona has no immigration laws.

it takes judges lawyers and agency specialists months and years to figure out who is legal and who isn't so i'm not really trusting of some redneck high school dropout cop who hates mexican people to be able to do any kind of an objective job of trying to determine it.

Is Arizona going to train all their cops in immigration law? Or no?

The governor made a very reasonable speech today after signing the bill, in which she passionately emphasized that the bill is not intended as carte blanche to violate anyone's civil rights.

Cops will have to be on their best professional behavior at all times. Some racist La Raza assholes will intentionally provoke confrontations until they catch a cop on film making a mistake. If the cops keep their shit together and don't make mistakes, this will be one of the best things to happen to Arizona and the country.

Skjellyfetti wrote:it takes judges lawyers and agency specialists months and years to figure out who is legal and who isn't ...

This is true only because of leftie jerkwads, not because it is inherently difficult to do.

native wrote:The governor made a very reasonable speech today after signing the bill, in which she passionately emphasized that the bill is not intended as carte blanche to violate anyone's civil rights.

Cops will have to be on their best professional behavior at all times. Some racist La Raza assholes will intentionally provoke confrontations until they catch a cop on film making a mistake. If the cops keep their shit together and don't make mistakes, this will be one of the best things to happen to Arizona and thed country.

What law since Jim Crow is intended to violate civil rights? Of course that's what she's going to say.

native wrote:The governor made a very reasonable speech today after signing the bill, in which she passionately emphasized that the bill is not intended as carte blanche to violate anyone's civil rights.

Cops will have to be on their best professional behavior at all times. Some racist La Raza assholes will intentionally provoke confrontations until they catch a cop on film making a mistake. If the cops keep their shit together and don't make mistakes, this will be one of the best things to happen to Arizona and thed country.

I'm certainly open to the idea that "This will work"
I am curious to hear a detailed argument against this law... because so far all I've heard is "emotion" kinda like what Col. pointed out... I'm interested in hearing a non-emotional account of "why" this is a bad thing

From CNN:

...The bill requires immigrants to carry their alien registration documents at all times and requires police to question people if there is reason to suspect that they're in the United States illegally. It also targets those who hire illegal immigrant day laborers or knowingly transport them.

The Republican governor also issued an executive order that requires additional training for local officers on how to implement the law without engaging in racial profiling or discrimination.

"This training will include what does and does not constitute reasonable suspicion that a person is not legally present in the United States," Brewer said after signing the bill.

"Racial profiling is illegal. It is illegal in America, and it's certainly illegal in Arizona," Brewer said.

The rules, to be established in by the Arizona Peace Officers Standards and Training Board, are due back to her in May. The law goes into effect 90 days after the close of the legislative session, which has not been determined.

Previously, officers could check someone's immigration status only if that person was suspected in another crime....

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/23/ ... 3A+U.S.%29" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

danefan wrote:

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote: But aren't there already Federal laws in place that are not being enforced? Couldn't it be argued that the local folks are enforcing these laws as well as their own for the protection that the Federal government can't provide efficiently?

Yes, but that doesn't give the local authorities the right to enforce federal laws without delegation of those duties. Federal laws like this are federal for a reason - consistency across all States. Allowing states to enforce federal laws without specific oversight and delegation could lead to some very different applications of the law.

Plus, I'd like to just point out that these criminals are illegally entering the United States, not Arizona. Arizona has no immigration laws.

But do they have a right to enforce a state law that is homogeneous with the Federal law? I take it that you don't think they do and I'll defer to your judgment but I'm wondering if that may be the thinking.

Chizzang wrote:

native wrote:The governor made a very reasonable speech today after signing the bill, in which she passionately emphasized that the bill is not intended as carte blanche to violate anyone's civil rights.

Cops will have to be on their best professional behavior at all times. Some racist La Raza assholes will intentionally provoke confrontations until they catch a cop on film making a mistake. If the cops keep their shit together and don't make mistakes, this will be one of the best things to happen to Arizona and thed country.

I'm certainly open to the idea that "This will work"
I am curious to hear a detailed argument against this law... because so far all I've heard is "emotion" kinda like what Col. pointed out... I'm interested in hearing a non-emotional account of "why" this is a bad thing

1. Its not within a State's authority to enforce federal laws, the enforcement of which has not been delegated to them.
2. These criminals are not entering Arizona illegaly. They are entering the United States illegaly.
3. The potential for widely varied application of a law intended to be uniform throughout the country is very high.

I'm not against local authorities being deputized by the Feds to enforce immigration laws. In fact I think its stupid that the Feds haven't utilized this in the past. I am, however, against the legal precadent this will set.

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:

danefan wrote:
Yes, but that doesn't give the local authorities the right to enforce federal laws without delegation of those duties. Federal laws like this are federal for a reason - consistency across all States. Allowing states to enforce federal laws without specific oversight and delegation could lead to some very different applications of the law.

Plus, I'd like to just point out that these criminals are illegally entering the United States, not Arizona. Arizona has no immigration laws.

But do they have a right to enforce a state law that is homogeneous with the Federal law? I take it that you don't think they do and I'll defer to your judgment but I'm wondering if that may be the thinking.

They absolutely have the right to enforce a local law that is even word-for-word the same as a federal law, so long as that law is not preempted by the Federal goverment. That happens all the time and rightfully so. But that isn't what they are doing here. They are just trying to enforce a Federal law because they don't like the way the feds are enforcing it.

danefan wrote:

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote: But do they have a right to enforce a state law that is homogeneous with the Federal law? I take it that you don't think they do and I'll defer to your judgment but I'm wondering if that may be the thinking.

They absolutely have the right to enforce a local law that is even word-for-word the same as a federal law, so long as that law is not preempted by the Federal goverment. That happens all the time and rightfully so. But that isn't what they are doing here. They are just trying to enforce a Federal law because they don't like the way the feds are enforcing it.

It's worse than you suggest. The Tucson sector is exremely dangerous and has not been cleaned up like other sectors.

danefan wrote:

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote: But do they have a right to enforce a state law that is homogeneous with the Federal law? I take it that you don't think they do and I'll defer to your judgment but I'm wondering if that may be the thinking.

They absolutely have the right to enforce a local law that is even word-for-word the same as a federal law, so long as that law is not preempted by the Federal goverment. That happens all the time and rightfully so. But that isn't what they are doing here. They are just trying to enforce a Federal law because they don't like the way the feds are enforcing it.

Got it.

danefan wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
I'm certainly open to the idea that "This will work"
I am curious to hear a detailed argument against this law... because so far all I've heard is "emotion" kinda like what Col. pointed out... I'm interested in hearing a non-emotional account of "why" this is a bad thing

1. Its not within a State's authority to enforce federal laws, the enforcement of which has not been delegated to them.
2. These criminals are not entering Arizona illegaly. They are entering the United States illegaly.
3. The potential for widely varied application of a law intended to be uniform throughout the country is very high.

I'm not against local authorities being deputized by the Feds to enforce immigration laws. In fact I think its stupid that the Feds haven't utilized this in the past. I am, however, against the legal precadent this will set.

To be consistent, I have to agree with you about the federal/state issue...Immigration law is federal...

But I have to point out you have no problem with the feds doing things that are not federal responsibilities per the 10th Amendment...

native wrote:

danefan wrote:
They absolutely have the right to enforce a local law that is even word-for-word the same as a federal law, so long as that law is not preempted by the Federal goverment. That happens all the time and rightfully so. But that isn't what they are doing here. They are just trying to enforce a Federal law because they don't like the way the feds are enforcing it.

It's worse than you suggest. The Tucson sector is exremely dangerous and has not been cleaned up like other sectors.

These people aren't committing crimes because they are illegal aliens though. They are criminal committing state crimes and they also happen to be illegal aliens.

The Tuscon police have the authority now to arrest anyone they want that commits a state crime. They also have the delegated authority to question those suspected of a crime as to their immigration status. If they come back as illegal they should then turn them over to the Feds. What the Feds do is a completely different issue. One that is rightfully dealt with at the Federal level.

Listen, I'm 100% against illegal immigration. I'm also 100% against amnesty. But I'm 100% against anyone but the Feds enforcing Federal laws unless the Federal government delegates that power.