Posted on 07/26/2007 11:01:07 AM PDT by Pyro7480
Thanks for the mutual Mea Culpa... I’m gonna call it a night. We can carry on perhaps tomorrow. Goodnight, all.
RTO
deprive residents of their constitutional rights to equal protection and due process
HUH?
OK, I got it. Thanks.
Why am I not surprised.
“Sanctuary Cities” (and counties, and states) should be denied ALL money from the Federal Government.
“I will never be powerless.”
If you say so. However, if you’re in a land of sheep, and the overwhelming majority either go along, or support the direction we’re headed, your options are limited, very limited.
I wish it weren’t so, but until/unless America wakes up and realizes what’s happening to freedom, we are doomed. The only difference is, you and I know what’s being lost, the sheep don’t.
The people at Ruby Ridge didn’t think they were powerless either.
The federal government MAY arguably regulate immigration. To the best of my knowledge, there is NO constitutional REQUIREMENT that it regulate immigration. There are federal statutes purporting to regulate and it would seem that the federal government is not enforcing those laws. It also seems quite unlikely that the federales will enforce those laws on the southern border any time soon.
Since those opposed to "illegal" immigration seem determined to have a perfect bill or none at all, and since Dubya seems adamant that he will not support what those who would hermetically seal the border while making no concessions whatsoever are demanding, there will be no legislation between now and election 2008. There is also a Demonratic Congress that is not about to give the border enforcers any bill at all much less the "perfection" (in their POV) which they demand.
As things stand, the Demonrats are as likely as not to increase their grip on Congress AND elect a POTUS in 2008. That will not help the border closers with that "perfection" bill which will then be postponed until at least 2012 and possibly 2016 just in terms of having a Demonrat POTUS and whatever sort of Congress. As despicable DIFI observed, the status quo IS amnesty. The border closers will not compromise, will not accept any bill which deals comprehensively with the problem and will oppose any other bill to its death. OK, be prepared to accommodate ANOTHER 12-20 million "illegals" on top of the present 12-20 million "illegals." None of them are going back other than a handful of atrocious criminals, not shoplifters or petty thieves and some handful who miss the charm of their old home towns in Mexico.
No nominatable Demonrat will change the lack of federal enforcement. No Republican is likely to change enforcement in office without a comprehensive solution.
Anchor babies are provided for in the 14th Amendment. That is not going to change. 12-20 million are bearing anchor babies now. If a Demonrat POTUS is elected in 2008, then there will be twice as many bearing anchor babies in a few short years. Then the anchor babies will be old enough to have kids, etc. This question of the immigration is already resolved by history and biology. All that remains is whether there will be any limits whatsoever in the future (as part of a comprehensive bill) and whether anyone but Demonrats will be able to get the votes of the socially conservative people coming from south of the border if the ugliness of the resistance continues.
The states cannot enforce federal immigration laws other than to turn "illegals" over to the federal authorities who have every right to decline to prosecute for whatever reason and they will decline and to turn them loose again. States, for example, have no authority to prosecute federal tax violations, federal kidnapping violations, federal bank robbery violations.
More importantly, while states may legislate against kidnapping or bank robbery under their own statutes, the states are specifically forbidden to treat "illegals" differently from their treatment of anyone else by the text of Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. Like it or not "illegals" are subject to the jurisdiction of state authorities and are "persons" within the meaning of the 14th Amendment. Not only are the states not REQUIRED to prosecute "illegals" for being "illegals", but they are forbidden to do so. See also the Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the constitution requiring submission to federal constitution, treaties and federal laws subject to the constitution.
Remotely, you might have a constitutional solution if Congress enacts a law, over POTUS veto as necessary, delegating to the states the FEDERAL role as necessary to apprehend and deport "illegals." I don't see that happening but I could be wrong. I suspect that won't happen either especially if not funded by the Congress. Further, local law enforcement would soon grind to a halt for lack of prison facilities to house "illegals" pending trial. If everyone insisted on a jury trial (to which each would be entitled) for any criminal charge and for "illegal" immigration charges, you will have judicial amnesty by prosecutors exercising prosecutorial discretion and a genuine constitutional crisis. The case
We need to ID and target every one of these pecksniff elitists for recall or defeat when they stand for re-election.
Was this Judge a democrat appointment?
How can a judge possibly refuse to allow people to protect themselves from lawbreakers? I don’t know, but he’s trying.
Amen, and Adios, illegal amigos!
Yes, appointed by the most corrupt President in American history, William J. Clintoon.
I don’t understand your response. It would take a Constitutional Amendment to allow non-citizens to vote. That will never happen, regardless of how hysterical people try to act about it.
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.