Posted on 05/20/2014 2:57:47 PM PDT by ObamahatesPACoal
As House Republican leaders prepare to unveil their plan for immigration reform, addressing the undocumented population remains the thorniest issue.
The New York Times reported Tuesday that the GOP's framework will call for a path to legal status for many of the 11.7 million immigrants living here without papers. But the document specifically opposes a "special pathway to citizenship," except for undocumented immigrants brought to the U.S. as children.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationaljournal.com ...
Seems nothing but totally open borders, and border crossers greeted with a brass band and citizenship applications, will satisfy our politicians.
We have always had borders and immigration laws. We’ve never allowed in just anybody who wanted to come in. Some potential immigrants were denied. Some were turned away at Ellis Island. Why is it suddenly “un-American” to deny citizenship to any and all who want it?
Jim Oberweis (who ran as Mr. Anti-Illegal 10 years ago) has been running on this one. It must be the new meme from the GOP establishment for their candidates. Apparently its OKAY to reward illegals with permanent residency here as long as they're not given citizenship right away (that's for up to some activist judge to grant in a few weeks).
In other news, I call for a path to free food from McDonald's for myself and my entire household. But I specifically oppose a special path to free Happy Meals from McDonald's.
If the entire Mexican Army shows up at the Nogales crossing demanding citizenship, does Jeff think we should just hand it over?
And if so, do they get to keep their weapons? After all, we do have a 2nd Amendment. For citizens...
And if so, Jeff....what's the difference between that and Invasion? Do we have to wait for them to start shooting?
That's precisely what the GOP establishment is claiming their position is.
As for me, I say they can have a path to "legal residency of some sort" by returning to their country of origin. If they don't want to do that, too bad. Illegal is illegal.
it’s now ok to break the law and steal public services without being a citizen? and in the end, you get rewarded for being ‘brave’?
what a load of happy horsesh*t
why are any of us filing taxes and paying speeding tickets then? none of us like those... yet we obey.
/table-flip
We have no real allies on this. Every single legislator has his/her price and is quite buyable. I don’t trust any of them.
“11.7 million”
You’re right, illegals must be dying of old age while waiting for Amnesty. Because they sure aren’t going back to their home countries.
At least 10 years ago a major Wall Street investment firm did their own census to get an accurate estimate of the illegal alien population in the US, and they came up with a figure approaching 30 million.
“Are Republicans that stupid????”
Yes. The late, great columnist Samuel Francis referred to the GOP as “the stupid party” for a damned good reason. They hardly ever fail to disappoint conservatives.
Denham, you freak: What don’t you understand about law, borders, illegal and so forth. I believe you should be exiled for your traitorous views.
Politically correct interpretations of the Constitution's uniform Rule of Naturalization Clause aside (Clause 4 of Section 8 of Article I), the states have never delegated to the feds, via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate immigration, immigration thus a state power issue.
In fact, Thomas Jefferson had noted, in terms of the 10th Amendment nonetheless, that the states had reserved government power to regulate immigration uniquely to themselves, not to the federal government.
“4. _Resolved_, That alien friends are under the jurisdiction and protection of the laws of the State wherein they are: that no power over them has been delegated to the United States, nor prohibited to the individual States, distinct from their power over citizens. And it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people,” the act of the Congress of the United States, passed on the — day of July, 1798, intituled “An Act concerning aliens,” which assumes powers over alien friends, not delegated by the Constitution, is not law, but is altogether void, and of no force [emphasis added].” —Thomas Jefferson, Draft of the Kentucky Resolutions - October 1798.
Also, note that the Supreme Court has officially clarified that the Constitution's silence about any issue, immigration in this example, means that such powers are actually prohibited to the federal government.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
So what House RINOs need to do if they want the feds to have the constitutional authority to regulate immigration is this. They need to exercise their only constitutional option and comply with the Constitution’s Article V by rallying Congress to propose an immigration amendment to the Constitution to the states for ratification. And if the states choose to ratify the House RINO's amendment, then Congress will have the constitutional authority that it needs to regulate immigration and House RINOs will be heroes.
As a side note to this thread, this must be an election year.
So what he is saying is that we are un American to oppose giving illegals who broke multiple laws, our jobs leaving us unemployed.
It’s also “un-American” for the “undocumented” to break into America to freeload, extort, rape, molest, murder and steal. They can take that crap back home with them.
Interesting stuff. Thanks.
To quote myself, as I have said repeatedly here at FR, “If the GOP is party to alien invader amnesty, they will cease to exist on the day after the next election. Don’t think it can happen? Check out the Progressive Conservative Party in Canada. the went from a governing majority to TWO seat in Parliament in one election.”
They lost 151 of 153 seats in Parliament! think about that. they lost 98.5 of their seats. Only the GOPe thinks they are immune to outcomes like that, but they are not.
Exactly!
He wants to give them citizenship. I was simply saying that if he wants to give them something, a visa makes more sense. They haven’t earned citizenship. I know people who have lived here for years, legally obtained visas, followed the law, waited years ... patiently ... before becoming citizens. And this idiot wants to give citizenship to fence jumpers?!
Absolutely correct! Calling them "Undocumented Immigrants" is like calling shoplifting an "Undocumented Sale."
“But the document specifically opposes a special pathway to citizenship,”
The key code word is SPECIAL.
Any path to citizenship as part of amnesty is a special path.
But the word special is their code word to fool us into thinking it means 'none' while giving it to them (citizenship) . The trick is to watch for words that don't seem to fit.
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.