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

Skip to comments.

"Texas town's immigrant-renting rule is struck down" TX voters told they're wrong. (my title)
Yahoo! Finance (Associated Press) ^ | Thursday May 29, 8:38 am ET | Anabelle Garay

Posted on 05/29/2008 6:41:46 PM PDT by I_Publius

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last
Well...I guess it doesn't matter what those people in Farmers Branch want, although they voted something like 80% in favor of what the court decided against. We, the people, just need to sit back and accept that our judges, politicians, and bourgeoise know what is best for us sheeple.

Bickel and Brewer Lawfirm http://www.bickelbrewer.com/95.html

Bill Brewer, Esquire - metioned in article Contact: wab@bickelbrewer.com

1 posted on 05/29/2008 6:41:47 PM PDT by I_Publius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: I_Publius

When the 2nd American Revolution comes, the black-robed Federal tyrants will be the first to face justice.


2 posted on 05/29/2008 6:48:54 PM PDT by clee1 (We use 43 muscles to frown, 17 to smile, and 2 to pull a trigger. I'm lazy and I'm tired of smiling.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: I_Publius
["Only the federal government can regulate immigration..."]

And there's the catch-22: Only the federal government can regulate immigration, and they have no intention of doing it, so everybody better STFU, learn Spanish, and get with the New World Order agenda. Between this insanity, and failure to permit increased energy supplies, and the obscene spending, it's just about time for torches and pitchforks at the DC Mall.

3 posted on 05/29/2008 6:51:06 PM PDT by Mad_Tom_Rackham ("The land of the Free...Because of the Brave")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: I_Publius

AP continues to get the story wrong. The ordinance passed by the Council was thrown out. The ordinance voted on by the public has not yet taken effect, and the court refused to decide whether it’s constitutional until it’s effective and someone sues.


4 posted on 05/29/2008 6:57:02 PM PDT by ArmstedFragg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mad_Tom_Rackham; Congressman Billybob

Is this the supremacy clause (VI. 2)?


This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

It almost reads as though that if state law contradicts federal law, provided that the state law is constitutional, that the state law is supreme.


5 posted on 05/29/2008 6:57:24 PM PDT by scrabblehack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: I_Publius

I thought the headline meant “renting immigrants” like, for a day - use them and return them to Mexico.

LOL


6 posted on 05/29/2008 6:57:41 PM PDT by RockinRight (Supreme Court Justice Fred Thompson. The next best place for Fred.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: I_Publius
Only the federal government can regulate immigration, U.S. District Judge Sam A. Lindsay concluded in his decision. The city didn't defer to the federal government on the matter, violating the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution, which allows for the federal government to pre-empt local laws, Lindsay said .... The city's attempts to salvage the ordinance faltered because they would have required the court to draft laws, he said. That function is outside the court's duties.

I'm confused on two points.

1. It looks to me like the city's primary role was in regulating real estate rentals, which is a traditional role of local government. I wonder if this precedent will apply to other cities that are discussing regulating CO2 emissions (will these cities limit how long athletic teams can practice based on CO2 exhaled, or can teams get around the rules if they buy carbon credits and pay other residents for couch potato services? ), since under this reasoning such regulations would be unconstitutional because the EPA is responsible for air quality ... nevermind ... regulating CO2 is liberal intervention, so it's okay with this sort of judge.

2. When has an activist judge ever shied away from creatively drafting laws from the bench? Oh, right. Making the law on rentals work would have the effect of promoting the conservative position that immigration law should be followed, not an outcome favored by liberal judges.

Pathetic. Liberal or conservative, judges should enforce the laws as written, subject to the restriction that the laws must comply with a strict reading of the federal constitution and where appropriate the state constitution.

7 posted on 05/29/2008 7:00:16 PM PDT by RogerD (Public School Teacher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: I_Publius

>> “Texas town’s immigrant-renting rule is struck down” <<

That’s funny... all over Texas, you can rent a slave for about $1.20 an hour.

A little honesty, Senors Bush, McCain and Mahony: that’s what we’re talking about with H-2B visas: rent-a-slaves.


8 posted on 05/29/2008 7:02:05 PM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: scrabblehack

No, the supremacy law works the other way. Allow me to translate:

The Constitution, federal laws (made according to the Constitution), and treaties (made under the authority of the United States) are the Supreme Law of the land. Judges within the states must respect that fact, regardless of whatever the laws of their own states say.


9 posted on 05/29/2008 7:06:01 PM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: I_Publius
The city didn't defer to the federal government on the matter, violating the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution, which allows for the federal government to pre-empt local laws, Lindsay said.

How curious. I asked myself, "Gosh, aren't there some instances where an action violates both a state or local and a Federal law? If Mr. Judge's ruling is accurate, then this should not be possible. And all these lower-jurisdiction laws should be struck down. Right?

So I looked around for 15 seconds and found this:

"Often a particular criminal behavior will violate both a state and a federal law; the most frequently charged crimes that fall under both jurisdictions involve controlled substance violations (drug crimes) and drug conspiracy."

I get it. Laws a District judge doesn't like violate the Supremacy Clause. Maybe he thinks it's a judicial supremacy clause.

10 posted on 05/29/2008 7:07:58 PM PDT by SamuraiScot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clee1; Jack Black
When the 2nd American Revolution comes, the black-robed Federal tyrants will be the first to face justice.

 Given the entrenchment of the liberal establishment, it will more likely be a civil war.  There is a need for further realignment and simple strategizing.  I'm the nut that keeps asking to find out who/where I can help out in the effort, because the slow bleed is agonizing.  I'm also the nut who plans to vote for B.O. as I hope to accelerate the process.  By my thinkin' we're long overdue for a "conversation" on race (and other certain topics).  I can think of several different categories of organization for the war effort i.e. deprogramming savable libtards, database maintenence of rejects, on and on.  Of course, since the Lord loves Truth and Faith, our side will win.

Spiritually, I work on my heart so that the process will be a reluctant, tough-love, duty, rather than a fervent joy  i.e. I know I should be a Disciple rather than a Zealot.

11 posted on 05/29/2008 7:08:55 PM PDT by Harrius Magnus (I am the town square.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: I_Publius

So by the same logic, neither a state or a local cop has any legal authority to make a drug arrest?

Cool.

P.S. Where do they find these idiots?


12 posted on 05/29/2008 7:11:13 PM PDT by Maceman (If you're not getting a tax cut, you're getting a pay cut.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: I_Publius
If the story is true, and there seems to be some question concerning the details, then what should happen is that the elected congressional representatives in that district who are in a position to do so should initiate impeachment proceedings at the earliest opportunity against U.S. District Judge Sam A. Lindsay. Legislating from the bench is not the problem it is a symptom of the problem. The problem is that the constitutional remedy's to a runaway judiciary are not used to put an end to such activity's.
13 posted on 05/29/2008 7:11:44 PM PDT by kublia khan (Absolute war brings total victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mad_Tom_Rackham

Well I got my torch *and* a pitchfork.


14 posted on 05/29/2008 7:15:11 PM PDT by farlander (Try not to wear milk bone underwear - it's a dog eat dog financial world)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: I_Publius

We the people need to start exercising our second amendment rights and learning lessons from our forefathers when they wrote the Declaration of Independance.

This Government no longer works to secure our freedoms and provide for our defense.


15 posted on 05/29/2008 7:19:09 PM PDT by tueffelhunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: I_Publius

So, you changed the title because you knew this very same article had been posted yesterday?

Under it’s real title.


16 posted on 05/29/2008 7:57:51 PM PDT by Redbob (WWJBD - "What Would Jack Bauer Do?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: I_Publius

So, you changed the title because you knew this very same article had been posted yesterday?

Under it’s real title.


17 posted on 05/29/2008 7:59:55 PM PDT by Redbob (WWJBD - "What Would Jack Bauer Do?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RogerD

Fear not: The 5th Circuit in New Orleans will slap this “judge” down like stray dog.


18 posted on 05/29/2008 8:01:49 PM PDT by Redbob (WWJBD - "What Would Jack Bauer Do?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Redbob

Darn....ya caught me.


19 posted on 05/29/2008 8:27:10 PM PDT by I_Publius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: I_Publius

“U.S. District Judge Sam A. Lindsay”

Bill Clinton appointee.


20 posted on 05/29/2008 8:27:30 PM PDT by Rebelbase (McCain: The Third Bush Term ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next 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