Cain Wants Illegal Immigration Issue Shifted to States

The Corner / The National Review ^ | 11-27-2011 | Katrina Trinko

[org.whodat]

In both the Texas case of charging illegals to attend school and de canas v baca, the supreme court said, that deportation was a lawful option available to the cases. Seems the court thinks the states have a lot of power in this matter. You should note that holders boy did not argue law when he appealed the Alabama case, he argued feeling.

[TitansAFC]

For you:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/11/26/sheriff-arpaio-to-campaign-with-perry/

[magritte]

And you did not see illegals working in restaurants in 1995.

---

You may not have, since apparently you are only 15 years old...but us adults saw plenty of them...

[lonestar]

This explains a lot of why I wdonlt want him!

[org.whodat]

BINGO !

[P-Marlowe]

And you did not see illegals working in restaurants in 1995.

LOL!!!

What planet have you been living on?

[Windflier]

Alright. I can follow along with Herman, and can understand the points he was trying to make, but for heaven's sake...that wasn't nearly good enough for the average news consumer to easily grok, nor did it sound like a sound solution.

Herman, I'm really trying to hang in there with you. I really am, but you've got to do two things:

1. Formulate a simple statement of your position on this issue that most Americans can easily track with, and which comports with their desire to see our laws enforced, and the illegals returned to their countries of origin.

2. Learn to comfortably articulate it without slip sliding all over the place. It's just confusing, and doesn't inspire confidence at all.

Perhaps Herman should have a sit down with Jim Rob. He can fully articulate the best plan on the table in 30 seconds flat, with no effort at all.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2812556/posts?page=24#24

[Political Junkie Too]

The States of the Union are suffering from the irresponsibility of the Fed in NOT doing their job. It’s up to the Fed to clean up the screw up they caused over multiple administrations, and it is the responsibility of the people to kick the Feds butt, and make them do what they are chartered to do.

Exatly.

There is nothing in the Constitution that prevents the states from enforcing federal immigration law, other than the current controllers of the Federal government saying so.

The Constitution doe not let the states decide who can be a citizen and who cannot, but the states can enforce the laws, both local and federal.

-PJ

[lonestar]

In both the Texas case of charging illegals to attend school and de canas v baca, the supreme court said, that deportation was a lawful option available to the cases.

Where did you get that?

[Cicero]

This really makes zero sense.

State’s rights are important, but the Constitution gives certain rights and duties to the Federal government. One of them is defending our country and its borders.

Obviously there is room for the states to act against illegal immigrants as well. But to say that the Feds should stay out of it is . . . INSANE.

This is disturbingly like what he said about the right to life earlier—that it is up to the states whether or not to defend life. Well, our country has been corrupted by Roe v. Wade, but the Declaration of Independence, as a prelude to the Constitution, speaks of the three fundamental, inalienable rights—life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. If one of the states decided, for instance, that it’s OK to murder people and eliminates all punishment for that crime, sorry, that violates one of the basic principles on which the Constitution is based.

[lonestar]

Do you think it’s state’s rights to control the border?

[org.whodat]

Got carried away with the bingo, that is what the supreme court said in the school case and in de canas v. Baca. Naturalization is the duty of congress, all other powers are available to the states. They said if you deported the children and their parents then education became moot.

[The Pack Knight]

In response to whether that meant the states could allow illegal immigrants to “be put on a path toward legalization and toward citizenship,” Cain answered, “It would be up to the states as long as they did not break the federal law.”

So much for that "uniform Rule of Naturalization".

I don't know whether Cain is engaging in knee-jerk "states-rights"-ism or just plain punting on the issue, but he certainly doesn't give the answer of a federalist here. Federalists tend to be more familiar with the Constitution and the Enumerated Powers Doctrine.

[org.whodat]

The Texas rangers did it for years.

[Outlaw Woman]

Yes...we should ping shim don’t ya think?

[lonestar]

I know how you feel he was they guy I felt best about, and then he pulls this.

Keep your chins up! He'll be on tomorrow explaining that he didn't say what you heard him say.

[Mariner]

Cain's new position makes me wonder if he can read.

As in, the Constitution of the USA.

Sure, the states can arrest, but only the Feds can deport. And the Feds have the principle responsibility to secure the border...or not.

[shield]

It is called winging it.

[Cobra64]

The borders are the Feds responsibility.

Yup. I think there's sumthin' in the Constitution along those lines.

[Baynative]

Something to be shared. IMMIGRATION BY THE NUMBERS

( a video made years ago that is coming true)