Sic semper tyrannis.
Posted on 07/26/2007 11:01:07 AM PDT by Pyro7480
ALLENTOWN, Pa. (AP) -- A federal judge on Thursday struck down the city of Hazleton's tough immigration law, which has been emulated by cities around the country. The Illegal Immigration Relief Act sought to impose fines on landlords who rent to illegal immigrants and deny business permits to companies that give them jobs. Another measure would have required tenants to register with City Hall and pay for a rental permit.
It was pushed by Hazleton's Republican mayor last summer after two illegal immigrants were charged in a fatal shooting.
Hispanic groups and illegal immigrants sued in federal court to overturn the measures, saying they usurp the federal government's exclusive power to regulate immigration, deprive residents of their constitutional rights to equal protection and due process, and violate state and federal housing law.
From a legal standpoint, I think the judge was right. We always scream about liberal activist judges legislating from the bench.
Munley may or may not be a liberal activist judge, but so far it seems to me that it is in fact THE FEDERAL law enforcement’s(ICE, Homeland Security) job to keep illegal immigrants out. Not State or Local law enforcement.
I want them out of here too. I want our federal government to enforce the 3,200 laws already on the books to secure the border.
Can somebody please make a legal case why the actual decision was wrong? I’m willing to listen.
______________________________________________________
>>>In a 206-page opinion, Munley said the act was pre-empted by federal law and would violate due process rights.
“Whatever frustrations ... the city of Hazleton may feel about the current state of federal immigration enforcement, the nature of the political system in the United States prohibits the city from enacting ordinances that disrupt a carefully drawn federal statutory scheme,” Munley wrote.
“Even if federal law did not conflict with Hazleton’s measures, the city could not enact an ordinance that violates rights the Constitution guarantees to every person in the United States, whether legal resident or not,” he added.<<<<
But let us not panic.
Time for Plan B and Plan C, if necessary, to kick in.
All you can see is, “ ILLEGAL-ILLEGAL AND MORE ILLEGAL”
The whole bases of the way the Left operates is to contend the rights of the community over the rights of the individual, which includes private propriety. Because of your views on ILLEGALS you cannot see what it means to have any government use its powers to intrude into every aspect of our lives. I believe we should deport all of the Illegals but I do not want the problem fixed with this type of remedy.
No matter how you use your thin reasoning to justify your position do you want to have to apply to city hall to rent a home or apartment? We already have living space requirements in most cities. How dumb, soon every thing we do- buy grocery (illegals have to eat), ride a bus (illegals need transportation), watch a ballgame, have beer, or go on a date will require a permit so we prevent illegals from being here. And the other stupid bonus, “Pay a Fee”.
What does it take to open your eyes about being as free as we can be.
I’m not sure about that. I haven’t read the opinion, but I would like to see the rationale behind preemption in this case. There are local considerations, and the locals aren’t punishing the illegals, they are punishing others for dealing with them. Do the feds claim the exclusive right to deal with the illegals? If so, where does that jurisdiction end? Have the feds claimed that right by legislation? This is headed to the SCOTUS.
So this judge believes illegal aliens are protected by the Constitution because they're residing within our borders? That can not be allowed to stand!
How much more will we be able to take before it gets really ugly? I really think the dam is about to bust.
ping
No I'm not kidding, rebel.
That is my burden right now, and has been as long as I've owned my own home; most of my life.
It's called Real Estate Taxes, in California.
Just saying.
“U.S. District Judge James Munley on Tuesday ruled that landlords, tenants and businesses that cater to Hispanics faced “irreparable harm” from the laws and issued a temporary restraining order blocking their enforcement.”
What kind of demented perversion of “thinking” do these RATS practise?
Upholding the law is illegal because it harms the lawbreakers... like, WHAT?!?!?!
Right click on the link, then do a ‘save target as’ to download it to your machine, then read it offline. For some reason the link on the court’s site doesn’t open in my reader, but the file itself does.
Something odd about the pdf file, apparently. I had the same problem with the court’s link, but just downloading the file and opening it directly worked fine. Odd. Thanks for the tip on the reader.
10th amendment issue. There is no federal issue here since the city does not cross state lines.
Why a federal judge was involved is liberal photo op.
The mayor simply tells the judge to pack sand.
BTW, since judge have no enforcement arms of their decisions, we should stop listening to them.
The Republican elite are clueless as to what will happen, they only see short term profits. The Dems (especially the far left ones), on the other hand, know exactly what is going to happen, and they like it. A new base to pander to and get votes from, to assure their absolute power.
Sic semper tyrannis.
The thing is that in the fields of gun control, immigration, and the low level courts, the Democrats still control things. Bush never fired the appointees that Clinton put there (He couldn’t because of protections the Clintons put into place during their administration).
Appeal!
I didn’t know that. That explains a lot about Hillary’s lust for the top job...all those sleepers in place are aging too. If she were elected I can’t but believe the horns of Armageddon will sound the end of all we know.
“Since I would like this web site to continue to exist I hope they stay the heck off Freep. Armed rebellion in the United States should not even be a topic of debate here.”
Go tell that to our Founding Fathers. Go tell Tom Paine that there should be no debate.
From our Declaration of Independence:
“That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
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.