Laura Ingraham battles George Will as conservative civil war over immigration intensifies [VIDEO]

Daily Caller ^ | 02/10/2014

[HiJinx]

The Mexican illegals are a net 6 billion a year drain on the taxpayers!

Not to mention the $22 Billion in cash they sent home through Western Union (and others) last year.

[rottndog]

The Mexican illegals are a net 6 billion a year drain on the taxpayers!

That is a ludicrously low figure. The free health care alone is probably many times the $6B. Then throw in all the other freebies they get--food stamps, free school breakfast and lunches, housing assistance, ad infinitum...

And that still doesn't include the cost of crime by illegals...so many other facets as well. Makes my head hurt thinking about it.

[rottndog]

And did I mention ILLEGAL EITC claims that the IRS knows are fraudulent but still pays out....

[rmlew]

Our resident Jacobin is wrong. The sedan leftist was trying to get the immigrant vote for the 1800 campaign at the expense of the nation.
Article 1, Section 8 "To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;"
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions";
Secition 9 implicitly admits taht migration is under the control of Congress, and hence the Federal government.

Section. 9.
The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

[Amendment10]

It may not be obvious now, but note that Justice Joseph Story had commented that Section 9 dealt solely with the slave trade.

"§ 1327. The corresponding clause of the first draft of the constitution was in these words: "No tax, or duty, shall be laid, &c. on the migration, or importation of such persons, as the several states shall think proper to admit; nor shall such migration, or importation be prohibited." In this form it is obvious, that the migration and importation of slaves, which was the sole object of the clause (emphasis added), was in effect perpetuated, so long, as any state should choose to allow the traffic. --Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution 3:§§ 1327--31

Secition 9 implicitly admits taht migration is under the control of Congress, and hence the Federal government.

Regarding Section 9, or any other part of the Constitution, implicitly admitting anything, the Supreme Court has historically officially clarified that it is improper to interpolate meanings from the Constitution.

“3. The Constitution was written to be understood by the voters; its words and phrases were used in their normal and ordinary as distinguished from technical meaning; where the intention is clear, there is no room for construction and no excuse for interpolation or addition (emphasis added).” —United States v. Sprague, 1931.

[rmlew]

I notice that you ignore half my arguement and respond by cherry picking Supreme Court cases, ignoring others that say the opposite.

[Amendment10]

... ignoring others that say the opposite.

Well why don't you also cherry-pick and post what others are saying to likewise substantiate your assertions so that we can have a meaningful discussion?

[Paulie]

***an issue threatening to rip apart the uneasy alliance between the traditional and libertarian wings of the Republican Party.***

More like between those that respect the Constitution and those who think tyranny is a pretty good thing as long as they get their cut of the pie.

[Paulie]

***an issue threatening to rip apart the uneasy alliance between the traditional and libertarian wings of the Republican Party.***

More like between those that respect the Constitution and those who think tyranny is a pretty good thing as long as they get their cut of the pie.