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

Skip to comments.

Federal judge blocks Ala. illegal immigration law
AP ^ | August 29, 2011

Posted on 08/29/2011 12:27:09 PM PDT by Second Amendment First

A federal judge temporarily blocked enforcement of Alabama's new law cracking down on illegal immigration, ruling Monday that she needed more time to decide whether the law opposed by the Obama administration, church leaders and immigrant-rights groups is constitutional.

The brief order by U.S. District Judge Sharon L. Blackburn means the law won't take effect as scheduled on Thursday. The ruling was cheered by opponents who have compared the law to old Jim Crow-era statutes against racial integration.

But Blackburn didn't address whether the law is constitutional, and she could still let all or parts of the law take effect later. The judge said she will issue a longer ruling by Sept. 28.

(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Alabama
KEYWORDS: alabama; aliens; blackburn; blackrobedtyrants; bush1; bush41; crimalien; illegalimmigration; illegals; judge; judicialtyranny; sharonblackburn; sharonlblackburn; unexpected
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280 ... 341-353 next last
To: arrogantsob

(1) No, it wasn’t.

Southerners feared Yankee fanaticism and rightly so. Just look what happened after the war. Everything “the slavers” said would happen came true.

It was worse than “the slavers” had predicted.

(2) Yankees have always believed that poor Southerners are ignorant of their own true interests. Arrogance and hypocrisy are trademarks of the Yankee mindset.

(3) Good for you.

You are loyal to Washington, DC. You are loyal to Wall Street. You are loyal to Hollywood. You are loyal to Barack Hussein Obama.

Not my cup of tea.

(4) Yes, that’s the Yankee point of view on the Constitution: the states are administrative units of Washington, DC.

That is why Washington, DC micromanages literally every aspect of our lives in the 21st century.

(5) You keep claiming the war was about “the slavers” even though “the slavers” like Alexander Stephens (who was one of the bigger planters) were often opposed to secession.

(6) The war was actually about the Lincoln invasion. That is the only reason the entire Upper South seceded from the Union.


241 posted on 09/06/2011 10:25:48 PM PDT by WilliamHouston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies]

To: arrogantsob

(1) You mean an “Empire of Liberty,” right? A vast confederation of republics under the tiny federal government that existed until 1861. “These United States” as they were often called in the plural at the time.

(2) Abraham Lincoln and the Black Republicans created an “Empire of Tyranny,” the United State.

(3) That’s interesting.

I mean ... wasn’t slavery like in the Constitution? Didn’t the Founders protect slavery? I’m quite sure they did.

(4) The “poor Whites” could vote across all of Dixie. The two major holdouts were South Carolina and Rhode Island.

(5) In the North, whites had the freedom to live under a government controlled by the banks, railroads, and the corporations in the Gilded Age that the Union Army won at Gettysburg.

(6) In the 21st century, what is “freedom” in Yankeeland? The freedom to disfigure your body with tattoos, to be enslaved to a Wall Street credit card, to fight for “liberal democracy” in Iraq, the freedom to get an abortion, the freedom to get a “gay marriage” in Vermont and New York, the freedom to live off the taxes of working people with your EBT card.


242 posted on 09/06/2011 10:33:04 PM PDT by WilliamHouston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 239 | View Replies]

To: arrogantsob

(1) The Yankees keep changing their position on that issue. Like the time in the War of 1812 when New England wanted to secede. Like the time that Rhode Island seceded from the “perpetual union” for years.

(2) Alexander Hamilton’s brilliant scheme can be seen today in its modern incarnation - the Federal Reserve and the national debt.

All hail the brilliant Hamilton who has enslaved America to Wall Street and Chinese bondholders and incestuous central bankers.

(3) Funny how “perpetual union” disappeared in the Constitution of 1789 and the 10th Amendment appeared in its place.

(4) As if there is any limit upon the power of Washington, DC over our lives. Yeah right.

(5) I’m quite sure that Virginia and South Carolina were here long before America. In fact, I am quite sure that Great Britain acknowledged the independence of Virginia and South Carolina.

(6) No, they are not.

Virginia, Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina existed before the United States.

(7) Who cares about the Constitution of 1789? It has been a dead letter for 150 years now. It has never been less relevant than it is now in the year 2011.

Washington, DC isn’t restrained by the Constitution. The Lincoln-Obama Union isn’t constrained by law or public opinion.


243 posted on 09/06/2011 10:39:02 PM PDT by WilliamHouston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 238 | View Replies]

To: arrogantsob

(1) I’m less interested in the reasons why the South lost the war (which are fairly obvious) than the result of the war and the consequences for the South and the Republic.

(2) There were more dead Yankees because their soldiers and generals sucked compared to ours.

(3) Yes, Ulysses S. Grant who turned out to be one of the most corrupt presidents in American history.

(4) As I said before, the North’s own leadership realized that it has lost the war when it realized that the corporations, the banks, the railroads, and the robber barons had “won” the War Between the States.

(5) LMAO.

Lincoln was responsible for the invention of ... television?


244 posted on 09/06/2011 10:43:22 PM PDT by WilliamHouston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 236 | View Replies]

To: arrogantsob

And I hope you didn’t fall hook-line-and-sinker for everything they tried to brainwash you with in college (public “education” system). But alas, it appears that you did - don’t worry, you’re not the only one by far.


245 posted on 09/07/2011 6:13:56 AM PDT by 3boysdad (The very elect.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]

To: 3boysdad; cowboyway; southernsunshine; arrogantsob
And I hope you didn’t fall hook-line-and-sinker for everything they tried to brainwash you with in college (public “education” system).

I'm afraid that he has swallowed some rotten catfish stink bait. Combined with some of his favorite sun baked chicken liver with several deer tick bites, and we get this below:

States were never sovereign in any meaningful sense of the term not even under the Confederation but they had enough sovereignty to screw things up which they did

If the States aren't Sovereign then who delegated authority? They were not powers possessed by a consolidated people of all the states, but by a distinct people of each state; and as those who reserved were those who delegated, it follows, either that the reservation was to a consolidated people of all the states, or that the delegation of powers flowed from the people of the separate states. How can an inferior delegate authority to their superior? Simply cannot be done.

Taken from the Federalist papers:

"The assent and ratification of the people, not as individuals composing one entire nation, but as composing the distinct and independent states to which they belong, are the sources of the constitution. It is therefore not a national, but a federal compact"

246 posted on 09/07/2011 8:37:26 AM PDT by Idabilly (One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 245 | View Replies]

To: Idabilly
but they had enough sovereignty to screw things up which they did

but they had enough sovereignty to screw things up for us statists which they did

Fixed it.

247 posted on 09/07/2011 8:46:13 AM PDT by cowboyway (Molon labe : Deo Vindice : "Rebellion is always an option!!"--Jim Robinson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 246 | View Replies]

To: rockrr
I know that you aren’t very bright and we try not to hold that against you, but you do recognize the irony implied within that remark, right?

Pot, meet kettle....

Perhaps you can get one of your statist buddies to 'splain it to you.

;-)

((snicker))

lol!

248 posted on 09/07/2011 8:52:22 AM PDT by cowboyway (Molon labe : Deo Vindice : "Rebellion is always an option!!"--Jim Robinson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 227 | View Replies]

To: arrogantsob
States were never sovereign in any meaningful sense of the term not even under the Confederation but they had enough sovereignty to screw things up which they did.

Nothing like kicking a dead horse..

The Federalist No. 39

That it will be a federal and not a national act, as these terms are understood by the objectors; the act of the people, as forming so many independent States, not as forming one aggregate nation, is obvious from this single consideration, that it is to result neither from the decision of a majority of the people of the Union, nor from that of a majority of the States. It must result from the unanimous assent of the several States that are parties to it, differing no otherwise from their ordinary assent than in its being expressed, not by the legislative authority, but by that of the people themselves. Were the people regarded in this transaction as forming one nation, the will of the majority of the whole people of the United States would bind the minority, in the same manner as the majority in each State must bind the minority; and the will of the majority must be determined either by a comparison of the individual votes, or by considering the will of the majority of the States as evidence of the will of a majority of the people of the United States. Neither of these rules have been adopted. Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act. In this relation, then, the new Constitution will, if established, be a federal, and not a national constitution.

249 posted on 09/07/2011 8:55:54 AM PDT by Idabilly (One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]

To: phi11yguy19
my apologies for being late to the ball!

You're not late, ignorantsob is still chasing his tail.

250 posted on 09/07/2011 9:44:36 AM PDT by southernsunshine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies]

To: cowboyway
but they had enough sovereignty to screw things up for us statists which they did

Succinctly stated, Sir!

251 posted on 09/07/2011 9:51:14 AM PDT by southernsunshine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 247 | View Replies]

To: Idabilly
Nothing like kicking a dead horse..

It appears the horse kicked ignorantsob in the head before it keeled over.

252 posted on 09/07/2011 9:53:15 AM PDT by southernsunshine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies]

To: southernsunshine

“”my apologies for being late to the ball!”

You’re not late, ignorantsob is still chasing his tail.”

LoL Think he might actually catch his tail this time?


253 posted on 09/07/2011 2:05:54 PM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 250 | View Replies]

To: Idabilly

Federalist 39 aside you could also demonstrate the nature of the Federal union being among 50 sovereign States not 310 million people by highlighting the fact that the common constitution could be modified by a mere minority of that arrogate whole.

The Idea that we are one nation is indeed technically a misnomer. We had to redefine the concept of nation to uses that term to refer to the Federal union.


254 posted on 09/07/2011 2:23:42 PM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies]

To: southernsunshine

“”Nothing like kicking a dead horse..”

It appears the horse kicked ignorantsob in the head before it keeled over.”

Or landed on him, seeing how iqnorantsob is unable to adjust his opinion to better reflect the facts at hand.


255 posted on 09/07/2011 2:26:58 PM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies]

To: Idabilly; cowboyway; southernsunshine; arrogantsob
Well put Idabilly. A-sob’s argument is the classic anti-American lefty college “educated” response to what they were told is American history. It is not unique at all, nor intelligent. But to be fair, many Americans have been reeled in by the lies promulgated by our “educational” system. Only those with true intelligence think through them over time and set themselves free.
256 posted on 09/07/2011 4:41:26 PM PDT by 3boysdad (The very elect.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 246 | View Replies]

To: 3boysdad
But to be fair, many Americans have been reeled in by the lies promulgated by our “educational” system. Only those with true intelligence think through them over time and set themselves free.

The sad part is that the so called 'conservative' yankees on this board agree that the educational system has been corrupted with liberal political correctness except for one subject in which they cling to the PC lies and revisionism: The War of Northern Aggression.

Yankee hypocrisy knows no bounds......

257 posted on 09/08/2011 6:38:33 AM PDT by cowboyway (Molon labe : Deo Vindice : "Rebellion is always an option!!"--Jim Robinson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies]

To: 3boysdad

Lord help us if we actually try and read some books rather than just pull opinions outta our butts. Or pay attention to people who have actually studied the period and people.

There has not been ONE fact or truth the LYING defenders of the slave power have produced.

My study of the RAT Rebellion started over fifty years ago and the propaganda I encountered for the first ten of that period was ALL pro-Secess. It took some time before I realized that I was taught to admire TRAITORS.

No thoughtful person relies upon or believes implicitly what he was taught in school not even engineers.


258 posted on 09/08/2011 2:29:27 PM PDT by arrogantsob (Why do They hate her so much?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies]

To: phi11yguy19

Do you often cheer LIARS? Or is this a special case?

He has not “documented” a single thing.


259 posted on 09/08/2011 2:45:09 PM PDT by arrogantsob (Why do They hate her so much?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies]

To: WilliamHouston

My loyalty is to the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, your delusional guesses not withstanding.

Stevens seceded and served the Slave Power.


260 posted on 09/08/2011 2:48:15 PM PDT by arrogantsob (Why do They hate her so much?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280 ... 341-353 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