Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sen. Charles Schumer promises action on Arizona immigration law
Los Angeles Times ^ | April 24, 2102 | By Lisa Mascaro

Posted on 04/24/2012 2:09:15 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer

WASHINGTON -- On the eve of the Supreme Court’s hearing of the Arizona immigration law, a top Democrat vowed to take congressional action if the high court upholds the state’s tough-on-immigration statute.

The proposal from Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) would surely extend the immigration debate and touch off a states’ rights fight with strong opinions on either side. Should the court uphold Arizona’s SB 1070, Schumer said his proposal would prohibit states from enacting or enforcing their own immigration law penalties unless they are working in concert with the federal government.

“I believe it is simply too damaging to our economy, and too dangerous to our democracy, to have 50 different states doing 50 different things with regard to immigration policy,” Schumer said during opening remarks at a hearing Tuesday.

(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Mexico; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Arizona
KEYWORDS: aliens; amnesty; arizona; border; immigration; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-47 last
To: Oldeconomybuyer
I had a big gob of Chuck U. Schumer on my shoe but I scrapped it off.


41 posted on 04/24/2012 3:51:58 PM PDT by Iron Munro (If Repub's paid as much attention to Rush Limbaugh as the Dem's do, we wouldn't be in this mess)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane

... snip ...
There’s no mechanism outlined for SCOTUS to strike down laws, either. It depends on what people are willing to accept, and what becomes habit. I don’t think we’re going to get public acceptance of Congressional oversight of SCOTUS opinions anytime soon.
... snip ...

No, the Jurisdiction of SCOTUS is well defined. For enforcement, the SCOTUS largely depends on what you talked about, peoples tolerances. Enforced by public opinion.

After that the only other recourse is Contumacy, but that would be declaring constitutional war ... not a bad idea given the concept of “Repealing Scotus decisions”.


42 posted on 04/24/2012 3:55:17 PM PDT by Usagi_yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
This is a loser for you clowns,Chuck U! Polls show a clear majority of Americans support a crackdown on wet...sorry,”undocumented workers”.
43 posted on 04/24/2012 4:46:26 PM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Unlike Mrs Obama,I've Been Proud Of This Country My *Entire* Life!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane

Powers not granted are reserved. Under the Compact Theory which says that the states are parties to the compact(Constitution) and the Constitution created the federal government, the states are the final arbiter of constitutionality of laws passed by the Legislative branch; executive orders, “guidances’”, etc written by the Executive branch; and decisions made by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has a self-vested interest as it is part of the federal government. They consistently make bad decisions i.e. Kelo vs. New London, Wickert vs. Filburn, etc and then we have to live with those bad precedent setting decisions.

The sovereign power is the people and the people have to say to their state legislatures that a law, executive order, or decision is unconstitutional and the state should nullify such. 35+ states passed legislation that private property would not be taken for private use and public benefit which basically nullified the Supreme Court decision in Kelo. Virginia recently nullified those unconstitutional provisions in the NDAA. There are numerous examples in our country’s history all the way back to the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798-99 where state nullification has been used.

The people of each state need to say “enough is enough” and make null and void, through their state legislatures, those unconstitutional actions of the federal government.

Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California need to nullify any decision by the Supreme Court that negatives the Arizona immigration law. I don’t expect NM and Calif. to do that because of their liberal views, but there is a good chance that Tex and Ariz would pass nullification. Those two states represent a large part of the southern border.
What will the feds do? Send in the troops? Cut off federal funding? The states need to say “Go ahead, make my day”. The feds would be powerless and our Union and Constitution would be intact. Powers not granted are reserved


44 posted on 04/24/2012 6:34:07 PM PDT by nmrancher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Why is a New York Senator who cannot even get a budget passed in the US Senate for over THREE YEARS, wasting his time meddling in the Arizona's affairs? Oh that's right the RAT party made promises to the "Hispanic community" and they have failed to deliver voting documents to the millions who invaded our country illegally, and are now doing a preemptive attack the day before SCOTUS declarres the AZ law not more onerous than the Fed laws. There just is no way they can argue before the Supremes that AZ is defining "immigration" differently than the Feds do - THE MAJOR DIFFERENCE IS THAT AZ MADE IT A STATE LAW TO "ENFORCE" THE FED LAW IN THE ABSCENSE OF ANY ENFORCEMENT ON OBOZO'S WATCH.
45 posted on 04/24/2012 7:14:12 PM PDT by Cheerio (Barry Hussein Soetoro-0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

Schmuckie must be reading Dubya’s old notes.


46 posted on 04/24/2012 7:17:16 PM PDT by Pelham (Marco Rubio, la raza trojan horse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pelham

W’s second term was underwhelming in many ways.


47 posted on 04/24/2012 7:20:18 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-47 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson