Posted on 10/07/2009 9:11:32 AM PDT by navysealdad
Mesa, Arizona - The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has stripped Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio of his authority to arrest suspected illegal immigrants
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
And he’s going to do it anyway. He should arrest the DOJ officials and deport them as well.
um.... huh?
he has been told not to do a CERTAIN PART of his job any more?
Sure to be a lengthy thread. “Rejecting what works” would be a great motto for this regime.
what the H happened to states rights?
No bias here... move along..
I would LOVE to be a fly on his office wall! LOL! I bet he’s using some SALTY language when referring to the idiots in DC! ;-) Go Joe!
Sheriff Joe needs the support of lots of people.
If anyone starts a thread with a petition for signing, please post it here on FR.
“Arpaio said he will be able to still conduct the crime sweeps under state human smuggling laws and an obscure federal law that allows local police to arrest illegal immigrants.
“Now I’m not under their control,” Arpaio said. “Nothing changes; that’s the irony of all of this.”
He will conduct one in two weeks “with a new twist.” Arpaio did not go into further detail about what that means.”
Obama has met his match. Joe is nobody’s fool, and has ice water in his veins ;-)
I thought you made that up until I went to the link. Geeezz.
I’m amazed they didn’t characterize Arpaio as “wrapped in a strait-jacket and biting the head off a whippet”
If a crime is committed in his county, then he not only has every right to go after the perpetrators, but he has a duty to do so in order to portect the people of his county.
Isn’t the current ‘head’ of Homeland Security from ARIZONA?????
The problems of illegals on the border states is tremendous.
Another radical trying to destroy the USA??
What authority do they have over him? This is a total crock.
Arpaio should swear out an arrest warrant for interference with a law officer against Napolitano.
Illegal means illegal ...
Isn’t he enforcing an AZ law the DHS Secy tried to veto when she was AZ gov ?
What in the Sam h**l is happening to our country. It is way past time for a revolution.
Look at the source of this story! Exultation that more Democrat voters can be created "at the stroke of a pen" to quote a famous lefty saying.
Feds?? What about the state’s rights?
Be ready to be labeled as a "domestic terrorist" if you fight against the passage of "card check".
“Arpaio said he will be able to still conduct the crime sweeps under state human smuggling laws and an obscure federal law that allows local police to arrest illegal immigrants.”
What do they mean by “obscure”? Isn’t it online just like the rest of the US Code? Or is it just that the other 3000 county sheriffs have been ignoring it?
“wagging his finger, waving his arms and snarling at reporters”
Real objective “journalism”.
I hope Holder and his sidekicks show up and try to stop him. LOL
I know this isn't exactly what this article is about but I just had to vent.
That would be my bet.
I read it, and it was a fun read. It will tell you how he thinks, and will prove to all that he is intelligent, street-wise, and fearless.
As someone who’s significant other is trying to do everything by the book, I can tell you that it is indeed considerably harder to get citizenship now than it was in the “Ellis Island” era (1890s-1920s).
>>>
Following his discharge from the Army in 1954 he moved to Washington, D.C. and became a policeman, moving in 1957 to Las Vegas, Nevada. He would serve in Nevada only six months before obtaining a job as a Special Agent with the Drug Enforcement Administration.[9] During his 25-year tenure with DEA, he was stationed in both Turkey and Mexico, and advanced to the position of head of the DEA’s Arizona branch.[10]
<<<
The States Can Stop Obama - by Sheriff Richard Mack
09-27-2009 • By Sheriff Richard Mack (Ret.)
By now we have all heard the clichets and seen the posters from the “Tea Parties” espousing freedom, less government, and perhaps most of all, how the federal government had better back off trying to shove their national healthcare down our otherwise healthy throats. The truth of the matter is all the slogans of “Don’t Tread On Me” or “Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death” or “We’re Mad As Hell And We’re Not Taking It Anymore,” don’t mean a thing when compared to reality; the real and actual answer to all the protests, marches, and outrage. The answer is in our own backyards! The States can stop every bit of it! That’s right, the individual States can stop “Obamacare” and all other forms of out-of-control federal government mandates and “big brother” tactics. If Arizona, Hawaii, New Hamshire, Texas, etc. want nothing to do with National Healthcare as proposed by Barack Obama or Congress, then all they have to do is say “No!”
For you skeptics who think the States could no more do this than fly to the moon, let’s look at the law. First, the U.S. Constitution is the ultimate and supreme law of the land. More specifically, the Bill of Rights was established, because some of our Founding Fathers, feared that the Constitution did not go far enough in restricting or limiting the central government. Hamilton was one of a select few who wanted a bigger and powerful federal government. However, several key states and powerful delegates such as Patrick Henry, said they would not support the formation of a new government if the Constitution did not contain a Bill of Rights, a supreme law to establish basic and fundamental human rights that could never, for all future American generations, be violated, altered or encroached upon by government. So the Framers of our Constitution came up with ten; ten God-given freedoms that would forever be held inviolable by our own governments.
The last of these basic foundational principles was the one to protect the power, sovereignty, and the autonomy of the States; the Tenth Amendment. This amendment and law underscores the entire purpose of the Constitution to limit government and forbids the federal government from becoming more powerful than the “creator.” Let’s be very clear here; the States in this case were the creator. They formed the federal government, not the other way around. Does anyone believe rationally that the States intended to form a new central government to control and command the States at will? Nothing could be further from the truth. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution details what duties the federal government will be responsible for under our new system of “balanced power.” Anything not mentioned in Article 1, Sec. 8, is “reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” (Tenth Amendment) Hence, the federal government was not allowed creativity or carte blanche to expand or assume power wherever and whenever they felt like it. The feds had only discrete and enumerated and very limited powers. Omnipotency was the last thing the Founding Fathers intended to award the newly formed federal government. They had just fought the Revolutionary War to stop such from Britain and their main concern was to prevent a recurrence here in America.
In perhaps the most recent and powerful Tenth Amendment decision in modern history, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Mack/Printz v U.S. that “States are not subject to federal direction.” But today’s federal Tories argue that the “supremecy clause” of the U.S. Constitution says that the federal government is supreme and thus, trumps the States in all matters. Wrong! The supremacy clause is dealt with in Mack/Printz, in which the Supreme Court stated once and for all that the only thing “supreme” is the constitution itself. Our constitutional system of checks and balances certainly did not make the federal government king over the states, counties, and cities. Justice Scalia opined for the majority in Mack/Printz, that “Our citizens would have two political capacities, one state and one federal, each protected from incursion by the other.” So yes, it is the duty of the State to stop the Obamacare “incursion.” To emphasize this principle Scalia quotes James Madison, “The local or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the Supremacy, no more subject within their respective spheres, to the general authority than the general authority is subject to them, within its own sphere.” The point to remember here is; where do we define the “sphere” of the federal government? That’s right; in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution and anything not found within this section belongs to the States or to the People. So where does health care belong? The last place it belongs is the President or Congress. It is NOT their responsiblity and the States need to make sure that Obama does not overstep his authority.
Just in case there is any doubt as to what the Supreme Court meant, let’s take one more look at Mack/Printz. “This separation of the two spheres is one of the Constitution’s structural protections of liberty. Hence, a double security arises to the rights of the people. The different governments will control each other...” What? The Constitution, the supreme law of the land, has as a “structural protection of liberty” that States will keep the federal government in check? No wonder it was called a system of “checks and balances.” The States (and Counties) are to maintain the balance of power by keeping the feds within their proper sphere.
“I hope Holder and his sidekicks show up and try to stop him. LOL”
I would like to be a fly on the wall ;-)
For the rest of Sheriff Mack’s articile, go here: http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/News/058388-2009-09-27-the-states-can-stop-obama-by-sheriff-richard-mack.htm
Go-Sheriff Joe-Go!!! BUMP!!!
I saw him the other day on some Discovery Channel show about how he runs his jail. Some gangster punk smarted off to him while he was on camera. He promptly sent him to the hole for thirty days. We need more like him.
“He is the duly, constitutionally elected Sheriff of the county. The top law enforcement officer of the county.”
He is all that and much more, but unfortunately, he can enforce federal crimes ‘only’ with the feds agreement.
Once they pull his federal commission, he is restricted to the enforcement of state laws only.
This does not mean that he is dead in the water, it just complicates things as he must now restrict his actions to only what is within the bounds of state law. I am admittedly rusty on some of this, but that is the way it was in my state 7 years ago.
Now he could get creative and still be a PIA for the feds, and somehow, I think Joe is just the guy that can do it. LOL
I was very good at legal workarounds and I wish the heck that I could be there.... it would be fun to stick it in DHS’s........... eye.
Well you had to just know that was coming.
Why? Because he was too successful at it?
From the article:
“....”It's all politics,” said Arpaio, who spent much of an afternoon news conference Tuesday wagging his finger, waving his arms and snarling at reporters....”
So much for unbiased reporting.
How can anyone read that and even try to pretend there is no agenda.
I absolutely agree and if they did, they could tell the feds to pound sand, to a point.
I am now and always have been supportive to local law enforcement particularly the elected Sheriff’s, but the feds have always managed to p** me off.
“If a crime is committed in his county, then he not only has every right to go after the perpetrators, but he has a duty to do so in order to portect the people of his county.”
When he’s going to jail himself ???
Can they do that? Seems that any one interfering with the enforcement of the law would subject themselves to being arrested themselves for aiding and abetting known criminals.
This could get really interesting.
Good thing its against state law to be ther illegally then, huh?
So if a kidnapper or a bank robber (violating federal law)is caught in his county then he’s not allowed to arrest them either? That’s a crock - they are breaking the law in his county and he has an obligation to catch them. If the feds don’t prosecute, that’s something else but he doesn’t prosecute he enforces.
It’s like the feds trying to say you can’t manufacture guns in a state solely for sale in that state and not subject to the interstate commerce clause giving them jurisdiction. They want it both ways but since it’s not France and we have the 10th Amendment it’s time to start naming the names of these bureacrats taking away our freedoms. They are traitors.
If there is such a law on their books, I’d love it... and I’d like to see it.
Can you point to it?
“So if a kidnapper or a bank robber (violating federal law)is caught in his county then he’s not allowed to arrest them either?”
No. That falls under state law too, so the state can arrest and charge.
“IMMIGRATION: Legal Immigrants welcome, Illegal entry is Not “
How many Jeff? Do you realize we are allowing about 4 Million a year in LEGALLY? Most of which are not vetted.
According the the US Government.......Add them up.....legal entries are over 2 million every year.(this does not account for approx 2 million more of asylum & refugee (under state dept..not in USCIS stats) seekers and work and student visa entries!)
Some of the DAILY work of USCIS according to their own document:
* Conduct 135,000 national security background checks
* process 30,000 applications for immigrant benefits
* Issue 7,000 permanent resident cards (green cards -PER DAY)
* Welcome 2100 new citizens. PER DAY * Welcome 3500 new permanent residents. PER DAY
http://uscis.gov/graphics/publicaffairs/DayinLife_050629.pdf
More than 1 million people became citizens in 2008, with 780,000 taking the oath of allegiance in the first 10 months, according to preliminary figures from the Department of Homeland Security. Leading countries of birth of new citizens were:
Mexico (122,258), India (46,871), Philippines (38,830), China (33,134) and Vietnam (27,921)
Largest number of people naturalizing lived in: California (181,684), New York (73,676) and Florida (54,563). SOURCE: Office of Immigration Statistics, Department of Homeland Security www.news-journalonline.com/NewsJournalOnline/News/WestVolusia/wvlHEAD03WEST012209.htm
We, the native population of this country are being displaced...’cleansed’. The middle class that brought this nation to greatness is being destroyed day by day. It’s happened before and don’t think for a minute it can’t happen again.
I agree but if the crime occurs in another state and not in Arizona then what ICE is in effect saying that there is no jurisdiction. It’s ridiculous.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.