E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Jae C. Hong / AP
Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, accompanied by by Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., talks to reporters in Aston, Pa., Monday, April 23, 2012.
Wednesday’s argument before the Supreme Court over the constitutionality of an Arizona law cracking down on illegal immigrants is almost as much of a 2012 campaign event as it is a courtroom face-off between the Obama administration and Republicans.
This week’s oral argument focuses attention on illegal immigration just a few days after the most prominent Latino Republican, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, highlighted the division between himself and Mitt Romney on the Arizona law, saying, “I do not believe that laws like Arizona’s should be a model for the country.”
A potential vice presidential running mate for Romney, Rubio campaigned with Romney on Monday in the Philadelphia suburbs. Romney told reporters he was studying an immigration bill that Rubio is drafting.
Rubio also said last week, “I understand why the people of Arizona did what they did (in passing the immigration law, known as S.B. 1070) and I think if you live in a state like Arizona that was facing and is facing the challenges that Arizona faces, people would understand why they reacted the way they did.”
He added that Arizona had a constitutional right to enact its law, but “I would much rather the federal government deal with the illegal immigration issue and modernize our legal immigration system ... .”
Rubio’s comments put him at odds with Romney, who in a debate in Arizona in February called the state’s immigration law “a model.”
Romney has also said he hoped the law “will be implemented with care and caution not to single out individuals based upon their ethnicity.”
More on Mitt Romney's campaign stump with Florida Sen. Marco Rubio today, and Rubio as a possible GOP running mate.
The Arizona law, enacted in 2010 by a Republican-controlled legislature and signed by Republican Gov. Jan Brewer, makes it a state crime for non-citizens who are unlawfully in the United States to work in Arizona, requires police officers to check the immigration status of any person involved in a routine stop, and requires the arrest of any person whom a police officer has probable cause to believe is an illegal immigrant.
Recommended: Mexican immigration to U.S. at a standstill, report says
Before the Supreme Court
Wednesday’s argument is the second time in two years that an Arizona immigration statute has been before the high court.
Last May, in a 5-3 decision, the justices upheld an Arizona law requiring employers to use the federal E-Verify system to check the legal status of newly hired employees, and which permits the state to revoke business licenses of employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants.
Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, who served as President Barack Obama’s solicitor general, recused herself from that case and also from the case being argued Wednesday.
Arguing for Arizona on Wednesday will be Paul Clement, who served as solicitor general in the Bush administration; facing him will be Donald Verrilli, the current solicitor general. They’re the same duo who squared off in the oral argument at the high court three weeks ago over the the president's health care overhaul.
Kagan’s recusal creates the possibility of a four-to-four split among the justices. Such a split would leave in place the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit which blocked enforcement of key sections of the Arizona law last year.
But the appeals court decision wouldn’t be binding precedent, which means other states could enact laws similar to Arizona’s (as a few states already have done) and hope a future Supreme Court ruling would uphold them.
The Obama administration argues that regulating immigration is the job of the federal government, not the states, and that where the federal government has pre-empted state action, no state can intrude on federal turf.
Verrilli says in his brief to the high court that allowing states to put illegal immigrants in jail “would impermissibly interfere with the Executive Branch’s discretion, conferred by Congress, to determine whether or not a particular alien’s unlawful presence warrants detention or removal.”
The Arizona law, he contended, deprives the federal government of the power to decide whether a particular illegal immigrant in Arizona ought to deported or be allowed to stay in United States.
In an interview with NBC’s Pete Williams, Clement said a crucial issue is “to what extent Congress, having made it pretty clear they want the immigration laws enforced, can essentially have that judgment overridden in part by the Justice Department and their enforcement posture.”
The Supreme Court heads into its final week of courtroom arguments and will weigh the federal government's challenge to Arizona's immigration law. NBC's Pete Williams reports.
He contended that “this Arizona law is exactly what Congress had in mind, especially when it comes to making sure that there’s cooperation between state and local law enforcement and the federal immigration officials.”
In his brief, Clement also contended that the 1986 Simpson-Mazzoli immigration law focused “only on the demand side” by penalizing employers who hire illegal immigrants.
He said the Arizona law “reinforces” the 1986 federal law by “addressing the supply side” – punishing non-citizens unlawfully in the United States who try to work in Arizona.
What it could mean to Latino voters
Just as the high court’s “Obamacare” decision, when it is handed down this summer, will have an impact on the November election, so, too, will the Arizona decision.
If the justices rule in favor of Arizona, Democrats hope it will spark a surge of Latino voter registration and a wave of Latino votes in November not only in Arizona but in in hotly contested states such as Colorado, Nevada, and Florida.
Rep. Raul Grijalva, a Democrat who represents a Latino-majority congressional district in Arizona, said, “If the court were to uphold the law, the alternative left to many of us would be that we need to politically change the culture in Arizona because the court will not be that refuge for us.”
Conversely, if the justices strike down the law, “it’s kind of like, ‘we fought the law and we won.’ But that victory wouldn’t dampen what’s going on out there” with Democratic efforts to register and mobilize Latino voters, Grijalva said.
Stanford University political scientist Gary Segura, who is a principal in the polling firm Latino Decisions, said, “There’s only good news for the president in this one, at least among Latino voters and probably overall.”
Segura points to the increase in Latino voting in California after voters in that state approved Proposition 187 to deny state benefits to illegal immigrants in 1994. If the Supreme Court upholds the Arizona law, that would probably mobilize Latino voters more effectively than if the court strikes down the law, he said. But either way, “simply having the court raise the salience of immigration helps the president,” Segura said.
Romney seems aware that there’s some political risk for Republicans in the immigration issue. At a fund-raising event last week in Florida, Romney warned donors that polling shows Latinos overwhelmingly favoring Obama – a fact which "spells doom for us," he said.
Romney, Rubio, and other Republicans seem to be edging towards a more accommodating approach to younger non-citizens who were brought to the United States as children by their illegal immigrant parents.
The Senate has twice voted to reject the DREAM (Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors) Act which would give a road to citizenship to non-citizens who’d been brought to the United States as children under age 16 by their illegal immigrant parents.
Politico's Lois Romano, The Washington Post's Dan Balz and Democratic Pollster Fred Yang discuss Mitt Romney's options for running mate.
A new proposal?
Rubio has been crafting a Republican DREAM bill that would allow such young non-citizens to stay in the country and apply for residency.
Romney was non-committal Monday about Rubio’s proposal.
“He and I have spoken about his thinking on his version of a different act than the DREAM Act that’s been proposed in the Senate,” Romney told reporters Monday as Rubio stood by his side at a press conference.
Romney said “the one that’s been proposed in the Senate creates a new category of citizenship for certain individuals. The senator’s proposal does not create that new category, but instead provides visas” for younger people brought to United States by their illegal immigrant parents. “I’m taking a look at his proposal. It has many features to commend it, but it’s something that we’re studying.”
Referring to the Rubio proposal, Frank Sharry, a veteran advocate of comprehensive immigration reform, said “I think it has caught the Obama administration and some Democrats a little bit on the back foot.” Sharry said if Rubio can bring a dozen or so GOP senators with him to support his proposal it might create momentum for a vote in the Senate.
Romney said at that Florida fundraising event last week his party must offer a "Republican DREAM Act," although it’s not yet entirely clear how a GOP version would differ from the one which the Senate rejected in 2007 and again in 2010, with most Republican senators and some Democrats voting against it. Romney has pledged to veto the Democratic version of the DREAM Act.
As for this November’s election, Segura said there’s an important difference between the DREAM Act and the Arizona law. “The DREAM Act is a motivator around the issue of immigration for people who think that’s important and are emotionally attached to it, but S.B. 1070 has the potential to mobilize even people who are not all that interested in immigration.”
S.B. 1070 will have a wider motivating effect, he said, because the law opens the way to arresting people simply because they appear to be Latino or are speaking Spanish – even if they are American citizens or legal permanent residents. The only basis for identifying a non-citizen illegally in Arizona “would be the language that they’re speaking and their looks – and that affects all Latinos,” he said.
NBC's Pete Williams contributed to this report.
Leave a Comment:
The fed saying the state hasn't got the right to enforce laws that the fed choses not to, is just wrong. Shouldn't all presidents, and congressmen too for that mater, uphold the laws of this country?
If they fail to so so, then someone else should.
Representative of the Obama administration said it was their discretion whether or not they wanted to enforce the law.
The federal government has failed to act...a state ramps up their laws since they are immediately affected. Federal government still failing to act, takes state to court saying you can't do what we choose not to do.
Makes perfect sense.
Romney the "King of Flip Flops" doesn't have a chance even with Rubio in tow.
eric......are you taking bets??????
The "King" resides in the White House now
Wow, Eric. Checked the mirror lately? I VOTED for Obama based on HIS promises, among other things, to get us OUT of two unfunded wars ;(and yet, his 'timetable' to do so is exactly the same as Shrub's was), to protect a woman's right to choice/control of her own body; and yet his FIRST appointment to the Supremes was yet another CATHOLIC, whom he didn't even ASK her standing on the abortion issue, and in order to get his OWN party to sign off on his pig of a health care bill, he issued an EXECUTIVE order to prevent poor women access to abortions/birth control, his pledge to work for GAY rights, and yet at his instructions, to fight DADT tooth and nail, as well as to maintain the DOMA pos policy; and his promise to CLOSE (and safe guard our borders.
NEED I GO ON?
Heck, with DEMS like that, why would I not vote for the party that at least has a CLUE about FINANCE?
Obama has kept 177 promises to date! www.politifact.com
Obama is getting us out of the wars, and so what if Bush's time table was right.
Kagan is pro-choice. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0610/39096.html
I don't know what executive order you are talking about in regards to access to birth control.
Obama pushed and got the repeal of DADT.
Obama has done better than Bush on the border with more deportations.
Republicans got us into this mess with their "starve the beast" policies.
I don't believe you voted for Obama.
I believe the question this article attempts to ask is how the illegal immigration issue will affect the general election.
In my opinion, it is a wash or net loss for Obama, he will pick up some Latino votes because of his sympathetic stand on illegal immigration, but he will lose the votes of many moderate democrats and independents like myself for his attempts to undermine written law....America is just tired of free rides for law breakers, including those on Wall street.
As for Romney, his ho-hum, what was the question, stammering and bland personality will kill him.......I myself am pulling for Ron Paul to run as an independent and upset the business as usual apple cart.
Eric,
I have to agree about the "vote" part. Seems like the conservatives all claim they voted for the current President and then proceed to try and put him down with their conservative talking points. I have also been seeing more and more of them claiming to be an "Independent". But all you have to do is read their talking points to realize that they are really Tea Party or Republican. I beginning to wonder if they are embarrassed being a conservative or extremist far right Tea Party! LOL!
Eric, Obama has committed over 50 impeachable offenses.
@ Eric, I don't believe for one second that MOmaid voted for the POTUS in 2008, yet would choose to vote for Mitt stinkin Romney 4 years later. Especially after not knowing Kagan was pro-choice before spouting off like that, AND ignoring the fact that the Iraq war is now over, AND using the latest right wing meme about executive orders being some new terrifying thing that the POTUS is doing (executive orders are used by ALL Presidents!) . So I'm calling BS that MOmaid voted D in 2008 too :)
@ rock,
Really?? 50 impeachable offenses?? And the GOP isn't already holding impeachment hearings with Darrell Issa in charge of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee?
Please list all 50 of the impeachable offenses you mention for which the POTUS is responsible. Why someone would post a STUPID comment like that and not provide a list of said offenses is beyond me. Back up your statements with sources or else your comment is just another ignorable post...for which there are MANY on this thread. I'm dying to see the list you would give, if you reply at all...
Chudd and Eric plus many more on this thread are still pitifully wearing their blinders regarding O'bummer. Oh, except for the color of his skin for the black Demwits. You people are hopeless and you are part of the problem with America. You can pat yourself on the back for the horrible shape it is in today - on the verge of Socialism because of your "dear leader" who cowtails to the enemy and scoffs at the Constitution. That alone is an impeachable offense and he has done that many, many times so I wouldn't doubt if he's had 50 impeachable offenses. OPEN YOUR EYES! ANYONE but Obama in 2012. Four more years of him and he will finish us off!
Independent ?.....My behind,.talk is cheap, prove it !
@ Rosegirl, yet another right wing drive by with ZERO substance, but a nice list of FOX News talking points. Oh, and way to throw some racism in there too with "Oh, except for the color of his skin for the black Demwits"....full marks for squeezing that in there too :) Can't wait to hear you reply that the color of his skin has no bearing on why you don't like him :) I would love for you to enlighten us all with your list of socialist policies this POTUS has enacted in this country too....that should be good or a laugh.
Also, gotta like that "cowtails to the enemy and scoffs at the Constitution" line too....LOL....What enemies has the POTUS "cowtailed" to?? I'm guessing that you're referring to the apology for the murder of 16 innocent civilians by a rogue US soldier, and the apology for being stupid enough to burn another religions holy book while occupying their country (but who really knows what you're dreaming about in right winger land)? Those incidents ABSOLUTELY warranted an apology from the Commander in Chief, if not for any other reason than to keep the retribution and attacks aimed at our soldiers in that country to a minimum! Also, if the POTUS has violated the Constitution in any way, those decisions/laws will be struck down....and that hasn't happened yet that I know about. The same could be said for impeachable offenses, if there were any, the GOP would have proceedings on Darrell Issa's docket as we speak....but they're not doing that either??? I wonder why that is???
I am actually an Independent that DID vote for the POTUS in 2008, but have serious issues with his record on civil liberties and the health care plan (to name just a couple of things). I just wind up defending the POTUS more often than not on these boards because the right wing attacks are so outlandish and without merit that I can't bite my tongue, you right wingers live in an alternate universe! There are plenty of things the POTUS has done you could take issue with, you just choose to dream up a "socialist" meme, or that the Constitution was violated, or he's not a citizen, or he's a muslim, or he's a radical black christian, when the real truth is that the POTUS is clearly a center-right pragmatic corporatist! That's the issue with debate on the right and left today, we're constantly arguing about made up accusations and BS rhetoric that we're not focusing on the things really effecting us as citizens!
Now with all that said, and all of the issues I do have with the POTUS, I WILL be voting for him again as the only other choice in this glorious 2 party system we have is a draft dodging vulture capitalist that games the tax code and has the personality of a plant and the inability to relate to any other human!
@ Rosegirl, after reading your post again, I don't really think you know what an impeachable offense is do you?
I don't know what "cowtailing" is, but I'm pretty sure that a prosecutor has always had the discretion to prosecute or not. That is one the issues that the Federal government had with prosecutors in the South in the 1960's. The prosecutors would refuse to prosecute white defendants, while at the same time repeatedly prosecuting black defendants on charges for which there was no evidence.
In this country, Federal law is superior to state law. Some areas of the law are exclusively the Federal governments. This includes the ability to have treaties with foreign governments, declaring war, immigration law and policy.
Since the Republican party is incapable of passing any laws of substance which are intended to improve matters in the United States, the President has no choice but to choose to selectively enforce the immigration law.
USA, I bet you $10,000.00.
signed Romney
PS, this current administration has deported more illegal immigrants than the previous administration. Arizona didn't seem to want to pass its own laws back then now did it?
This current administration doesn't even want to send the President's illegal relatives back to their own country. Are you really one to judge about Arizona's laws?
@ Unhappy, I live in AZ, and the fact is that there are nearly 1 million fewer illegals in AZ than there were in 2009 due to deportations and our lack of construction jobs, but mostly due to deportations! Although I would tell you that even in 2008, it was NEVER the problem that right wingers made it out to be. There was a story about this just yesterday in the AZ Republic if you think I'm making it up. But again, in typical right winger fashion, pivot to something ridiculous, like the POTUS relatives, when your side is losing the argument....again...
You are "exhibit A" for what I described in comment 3.15, thanks for helping to prove my point :)
If that were true, he would have already been impeached. Proof please.
Not if the Libs get their way and all the illegals get to vote. We already saw voter fraud in the last election. Are we really supposed to believe that if the SCOTUS repeals voter ID laws, that illegals wont be bussed in from all over to vote Dem?
See my post #1.1 above.
The Illegals are already here and 1,000,000 of them will probably be allowed to VOTE once they are "permanent residents", thanks to Mr. Obama.
I'm not surprised. Lib agenda wants to give illegals same rights as citizens. US Constitution should apply only to citizens of the US. We cant be the soup kitchen for the whole world when we have our own citizens without work, food or housing.
Link me a case of illegal alien voter fraud.
Ruken,
Here you go....
http: www thecuttingedgenews.com/index.php?article=691
Illegal aliens testifying under oath as to voting in California elections...
Were there convictions?
Ruken,
If you read the article you would have seen that a grand jury ordered a clean up of the mess with illegal aliens being registered and it still hasn't happened. There is also another paragraph in the article that states the FBI conducted an investigation in 1997 and INS refused to cooperate. So you tell me.
There is not and hasn't been widespread voter fraud.
If you want photo ID, great, then make it easy for people to get them and make them free.
Why are people so worried about some influx of illegal aliens coming into the country? What do you think is happening?
Currently, from all the news I can find, the # of illegal aliens has dropped from last year to this. Due to the economy and to tougher detainment procedures, and, well, to the other side of the border being controlled by increasingly more unstable gangs.
But back to the "scare" here. US census and Mexican census pegs the number of illegal aliens at (depending on the stats you look at ) 6.1-8 million. If we take the total ADULT population of the US, (which was in 2008 - 228 million,
Do math.
that 8 million (higher figure for illegals, and assuming they are all adults, which they are not) is roughly 3.5% of the total adult population.
And you think this number is all going to register and vote, if given the chance? unlikely. We were lucky to get 56.8% voting of registered voters in 2008, 37% of registered voters to vote in 2010.
This 'fear' of some large block of mexican voters wrecking an election is bogus. The numbers here are a drop in the bucket, all told.
Why don't you spend your energy trying to get some of that 43.2% of registered voters who did not vote in 2008 out and into the polling stations? That would be a better use of your time and energy.
probably WE SHOULD THANKS TO RONALD REAGAN, WE REPUBLICAN WHO GAVE AMNESTY FIRST.
Hmmm, ask the free crowd democrats.
eric....................."make them easy to get and free".
Really?? The same people who can't seem to get an ID always seem to be able to get their carton of cigarettes and 12 pack of beer. If they want to be here and vote they better get off their ass and get an ID. The rest of us legal citizens have one.
I don't think this is necessarily a "liberal" agenda. I am a democrat and lean left on most issues, but one issue I will stay firmly planted on the right is immigration. It is NOT FAIR IN THE LEAST to let illegal immigrants work, live or vote in our country. They steal jobs from capable American citizens by offering to do it for half the price. I've seen this happen first hand. I don't mean to be insensitive but it's not fair! Taxes? Health care? We do not need to be paying for people who are here ILLEGALLY. Acquire your citizenship the right way! I don't understand why parents would do that to their children. Follow the rules and we wouldn't have an issue. It's just not right. No matter how you look at it, people need to follow the laws and there won't be a problem.
WCR...the ~3 million illegals granted amnesty under Reagan was pushed by Ted Kennedy and was promised to put a stop to illegal immigration following passage of the Simpson-Mazzoli act. As we know, illegal immigration was not stopped as promised, inspiring Reagan to say granting amnesty was the biggest mistake he made while president.
We let 3 million in sending the message that if you can steal in and stay long enough, the softy Americans will grant you amnesty. We now have 3 times as many or more wanting amnesty. Give them amnesty how many do you think will be wanting amnesty in another 25-30 years?
Wouldn't that defeat the purpose? If they were free & easy to get then anyone could get one, including um... illegal aliens.
Old people don't get around very easily. Homeless people can't afford I.D.'s. There are laws where a college photo ID doesn't count.
Yes, make them free and easy to get.
What's the alternative, make them very difficult to get?
The immigration issue comes down to one fact. Pandering. Every party just panders to the Latino's for votes, plain and simple. Here's some hindsight for ya, If the inept leaders in our government had moved to address this problem decades ago, there would be no need to pander to expanding blocs of latino voters, they'd still be in whatever country they snuck in from and the laws of the land would be determined by those who were actually born in America, to legal parents. I wonder, why would any latino be against illegal behavior?. If they cannot see immigration as an illegal act then they shouldn't be allowed to vote and change existing laws to suit there ancestrial needs.
Just saying that going down to the 7-11 to grab an ID isn't going to solve anything. Maybe set it up like getting a copy of your birth cert. at the courthouse. Old people have more time than anyone to handle it & I'm pretty sure the homeless could give a damn about voting as they have bigger issues to deal with. That's if it happens. I could care less either way; I don't even bother voting anymore because it's just one big scam job no matter who's "running the show"
Informed,
So you want to impose your restriction's to my right to vote because you "think" there is voter fraud! Really? Illegal's, even if they all voted wouldn't make a difference in a national election. And because of your worry about a possible "voter fraud" you would put restrictions on my RIGHT given by the Consitution, which by the way, I fought for in a war! I say take your photo ID and stuff it where the sun don't shine!
If I recall correctly . Wasn't there a lot of questions about the former President's wining the vote in Florida? The last time the right wing changed the voter laws was to prevent the poor and minorities from voting.The they claimed it was to ensure that we could have an educated vote.
The only voter fraud that has been present recently has been in the Republican caucuses and primaries. Particularly, Iowa, Maine, Nevada.... just about anywhere where it looked like "the annoited one" of the GOP might be defeated, particularly by Ron Paul.
However, because that fraud has been committed by the GOP, I guess it doesn't count.
Tengauge, all I saw at your post was:
War Against the Weak
Author Edwin Black Reports New Findings Showing North Carolina Engaged in Nazi-linked Campaign of Eugenics and Genocide
Dear listoire,
after the votes were recounted in Florida, turned out Bush actually won... but in the liberal media it never made the front page, but a small blurb where no one could find it. in fact, that's what the biased media posted it.
Here's an example. The state of California changed laws so that part of every individuals taxes would go to stem cell research (whether you agreed or not). Guess what, it was based on falsified data. Turns out the study done in Japan had falsified all the results - did you read about it any where ? did they change the law back ? Nope, its because some body's agenda is to move stem cell research forward no matter what or no matter that there are other better scientific discoveries that show more promise. Unfortunately these dont have biased supporters with hidden agenda.
so yes, there was loads of voter fraud in Obama campaing. some voter fraud here, some manipulation there - hey you got the Presidency
so you don't think there is a problem here in the us with immigration huh?
how about this then.north dakota only state with 1 billion surplus in tax revenue.now we go to the dmv to renew our licenses and you have to wait for 4 hours to do so because of the flood of bosnians in the state.WHY?......BECAUSE THEY KNOW WE HAVE MONEY IN SURPLUS SO THEY CAN SUCK WELFARE PROGRAMS DRY.OTHER STATES ARE GOING BROKE BECAUSE OF THIS FREE RIDE CRAP.NOW THEY ARE ALL HEADING UP HERE. then we will be broke like everyone else.DEMOCRATIC THINKING AT ITS FINEST!
Yet again the media tries to turn something into a racial arguement. This isn't about race this is about immigration law. What's the point of having immigration laws if Obama refuses to enforce them and sues anybody that does.
In Arizona, it's about race.
Obama hasn't refused to enforce them, in fact, he's done much better than Bush on the border and deportations.
I don't see any federal legislation coming from the Republicans in the house.
Eric-913730
In Arizona, it's about race.
Obama hasn't refused to enforce them, in fact, he's done much better than Bush on the border and deportations.
Duh, Dem Duh block equals no legistation.
The Obama administration has deported more Illegals in 3 years than Bush did in 8 years. Just a couple of weeks ago ICE rounded up and put in prison, getting ready for deportation a large number of criminial illegals. It was Regan who gave illegals amnesty. I have no problem with employers who hire illegals, being fined and put in prison, it is illegal after all. The federal government is responsible for immigration and enforcing the laws, it is not a responsiblity given to the states. By the way only 45% of illegals are from Mexico and South America. There are many illegals from all over the world and a lot of them are white. I'm tired of the garbage about illegals voting, they do not. Voting fraud is extremely rare, and nobody has been convicted of it. There could never be enough cases of voter fraud that would affect any real election. Election fraud however is a big problem. and the real ID crap, is a way of keeping people from voting.
Eric--Obama's so-called "deporting more illegals'' is based on the fact that under Bush, if you were caught at the border, you were fingerprinted and if found to have crossed illegally before, you were detained and TRIED, with possible prison sentences. That was a VERY big deterrent, particularly since it got those illegals out of the loop of working here and sending money back home, OR of being back home working, OR of being back home immediately 'trying again'.
Obama now sends all but the ones who are wanted for a violent felony back immediately (his version of deportation) so that they can try again the NEXT day.
If ANYTHING has slowed illegals coming over our border in the last three years, it is our punk economy. And even THAT hasn't stopped the DRUG smugglers.
I live very near the AZ-Mex border. BP has relaxed their efforts to control illegals coming across the border in the past 3 years. Who do you suppose told them to back off? The number of deportees has DECREASED during that period of time. Unless you have lived here or spent considerable time here, driving our roads, inspecting the "garbage dump sites" they leave behind in their travels, seen the economic stress that's put on the counties and states in free health care and other amenities that the federal government refuses to reimburse for the cost of illegals being here, you cannot be the judge. Do your due diligence before making statements that won't hold up under the truth. The Arizona law only gives law enforcement the right, within the parameters of performing normal daily duties, to detain illegal entities and turn them over to INS or BP. This is something that has been done for many years down here on the border. Of course, if they are arrested in the commission of a crime, they enter our judicial system and add to our economic crisis. Personally, I feel that each state should also have the right to protect their own borders from INVASION by ANYONE.
I see, so the answer to illegal immigration and unemployment is to build more jails in the US to house illegal immigrants.
Every illegal alien shoudl be deported, not just Criminals. I don't care if every illegal alien is a god fearing law abiding person, Illegal is illegal. Do things the right way and we will welcome you. Sneak in and take the easy way and you are a pariah, plain and simple. It shouldn't be about character when it comes to the law. There are many charming criminals in the world today, i still want them in jail or deported, where they belong.
Doing things the right way can take 15 years.
Eric-913730
Hell no deport their sorry ***** immediately, the hell with this hearing bull@!$%#.
Nope, won't take 15 years. Start fining and jailing every single person caught hiring an illegal. Soon, no one will hire one due to the risk of significant risk of increased cost of doing business. If there are no jobs, the ones here will self-deport and the incentive for others to come will be gone so no more will come.
Also, it might help if the federal government would start following the law and stop aiding and abetting illegals.
hs321,
Then I guess we should start with candidate Willard? Fine and jail? Is that what your are proposing?
If the US government decided to start requiring e-verify for ALL employees, and a federal worker ID card, the issue would still not be eliminated. You would still have students who stay beyond the date allowed on their visa, waiting for legal immigration status to come through. Since we don't have a decent method of processing temporary workers, short-term day workers would still sneak in.
Since probably a large number of illegal workers are working for cash, in the "underground" economy, we will never detect them and never be able to enforce the law.
It is estimated there are 11 MILLION illegal immigrants in the US. If there we full amnesty granted tomorrow and for the next six months, allowing anyone who is here, legally or illegally, to become a citizen simply by filling out a form, there would still likely be over 1 MILLION illegal immigrants by the end of the year. Much of it is simply paperwork not catching up to reality. And when this country is the most popular destination FOR THE WORLD, it will continue to happen.
Arizonan on the border: thanks for your comments, I too live in Arizona and you have nailed the issues...SB1070 is only a couple of pages long and nowhere does it say that racial profiling is OK...it absolutely states the opposite as you know. Obama is guilty of perpetuating lies about this law and I'm sick it. I'm also disgusted with the news media that doesn't call him out on his lies and distortions.
hs, ......Exactly, Illegal immigration has become the huge problem it has because the federal and state governments have not enforced the law or penalized employers as the 1986 immigration reform law mandates...............Logic would seem to say, " If there are no means of survival, illegal immigrants would not come, nor stay "...........Forget trying to round up illegal immigrants, go after American employers and the illegal immigrant problem will go away pronto.
Immigration law in the United States should be a mirror image of the law in Mexico itself:
"Under the Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony, punishable by up to two years in prison. Immigrants who are deported and attempt to re-enter can be imprisoned for 10 years. Visa violators can be sentenced to six-year terms. Mexicans who help illegal immigrants are considered criminals."
I wonder how the Supreme Court would handle that one?
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/may/03/mexicos-illegals-laws-tougher-than-arizonas/
Yeah--isn't it FUNNY how Mexico, which keeps crying about our treatment of illegals/"lack" of visas for EVERY poor and poorly educated Mexican to stream over here, not only has much stricter Immigration laws, but is ALSO building a FENCE on THEIR Southern border.
Seems they don't WANT the poor/poorly educated GUATEMALANS in THEIR country competing with Mexican citizens for jobs.
And since the indigenous population of Guatemala is a MUCH higher percentage INDIO, who is the racist here?
I'm thinking Mexico doesn't have to utilize their illegal immigration laws too often. who wants to risk the possibility of death, kidnapping, etc..
WHAT??
Man, all those mezzikans keep waving their flags up here all the time, telling us all how great a place it is.
Don't tell me they...they...LIED?
/:^0
(feigned shock)
Don, racist much?
slightlyold, kiss ass much?
My hopes is that it will mean better schools and housing for those coming into the US. Already the state provides services, but they could increase the funding a quality of these social services to help people get a good strong start in the US.
Chris--you know, the US is no longer underpopulated. We really don't NEED any new residents, and any that come here compete with the US citizens for EVERYTHING. (Jobs, government handouts, water, electricity, space on the roads, fire/police protection, etc.) So why on EARTH would we want to bring here, legally or illegally, people who do not already have the ability to be self sustaining, and to contribute to this country with special SKILLS?(and as a benefit, to the TAX base, as opposed to DRAWING from it.)
MOST other 'developed countries' require that. WE USED TO. The United States cannot BE the 'welfare state' for the whole world, any more than we can be the "police" for the whole world.
And ANY new immigrants we take in should be those who have something to offer US, and not the other way around.
Chirs150
Then I suggest you take in and soley support about 50 of these freebi sucking leeches.
Milo, I think Chirs was just being sarcastic; or at least I hope he was! I'm with you; I'm sick of the leeches, lawbreakers, drugs, crime, and disease pouring in here by the millions! Diseases that we had eradicated for decades like Measles, Whooping Cough, and Polio are back on the rise in our country because of illegals bringing it back in. I'm all for closing the borders completely! It's all we can do to take care of ourselves.
And are you personally going to fund the cost of all these perks?
Milo & MOmaid, have either of you driven through the Central Valley in August? How about on the line of a factory poultry farm in Arkansas? Are those the freebie sucking leeches you speak of? the ones working in conditions i doubt either of you smug self satisfied "'Merikans" would put up with. These days in this country being able to accept the worst of the worst jobs is a "special skill" that we need. if you want to be outraged about the loss of well paying blue and grey collar jobs, take it up with Romney, Rove, and every other SOB that believes that corporations are "just plain folk", who, ah shucks, are just sendin' those jobs away so they can make just a few dollars more for thier dear ol' mothers. As the corupt state rep on teh Wire says: "shiiiiiiiiiiiiii-i-i-a-a-ttttt!"
Mexican Hot Dog factory goes without workers in Oklahoma. After being lured by the tax breaks of an Oklahoma town, a Mexican Hot Dog factory is having problems keeping staff to make hot dogs. One foreman says he let an employee go on break and he never came back. Oklahoma town thought the factory would help solve its high unemployment rate. guess not. those "Mericans" just won't do the work.
This year could be the decade of the conservative court, they could nail Obama to his lefty cross pretty fast if they want. And they should! go for it. Legal anything is anathema to the demon-rats, they are always, always for illegal anything, because they k now it undermines our society and constitution. Anarchy is the friend of the demon-rats.
laws like the ones in arizona , that sheriff rape-ho endorses , and the witch of the west , with that crooked little finger of hers , wish i would have been that secret service guy there ,,, would have broken it off and stuck it in her,,,,,,,,,,,, oh god the thought ,,,,,, almost made me throw up !!!!
Good!
Pat do you live in Arizona? oh you dont? Then stay the hell out of our business.
IF Arizona law follows US law, then what is the problem? oh sorry, legal laws are the enemy of the lefties, they want anything illegal that undermines this countries laws. WHO in their right mind would want some that is illegal, and based on corruption? only stupid communists that call themselves Demon-rats. Any population that has witnessed communism first hand want to get away, and come to this country, they know it is a cancer, and Obama is a cancer, we need to eliminate it before it metastasizes.
If Arizona didn't want its law blocked, they should have written it so it didn't violate the Constitution.
Toasty--it remains to be seen if AZ's law actually DOES 'violate the Constitution', doesn't it?
Meanwhile, out of his own MOUTH, Obama has (despite being a self proclaimed "expert" on the constitution) amply demonstrated a desire to re-make the constitution. To suit HIS party agenda. And you know what? The constitution was WRITTEN partly to PREVENT that kind of thing.
lol, care to give us all an example of that, Momaid?
Didn't think so.
Toasty McGrath
Toasty please, the AZ law mirrors Federal Law!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
the only thing Arizona has done is to enforce existing laws that the socilist/Fourth Riech Obama has failed to enforce.
Arizona is fed up with slow or no response from the Feds and is only exercising the rights under the constitution.
Government shall have LIMETED POWER and that power shall be passed down to the STATES and its PEOPLE
Sorry guys, but 1070 went WAY beyond federal law. And it's FAR from the only law on the books, it's just the one that was heinous enough to make national news. We've been putting up with this @!$%# for ten years before 1070.
Well that's why it's before the Supreme Court. To find out if it is.
Like DOH!
Mexico sucks
If it was such a great place then why are they coming here.
That wasn't a question, btw...
Anyone who thinks Arizona's immigration law is tough should cross the border into Mexico and see how they are treated. Our immigration laws are a joke. Like it or not, at least Arizona had the will to get something done!
No, Arizona had the will to take away civil rights from its own people just to win the racist senior vote in Phoenix. I'm no longer sure our great state can survive much more "will."
Toasty--so, if you get stopped in your state for, lets say, a burned out taillight, or for running a stop sign, do YOUR cops ask to see you DL?
Gee, they do in MY state, and as a citizen I have NEVER thought that took away MY rights.
But I guess I can see how someone IN FAVOR of criminals staying in this country, willy nilly, would like to pretend that it does.
If you think that's the extent of the law, I'd advise you to stay out of Arizona. Ignorance is no excuse here.
Toasty you must be toasted. #1. What part did you not understand of ILLEAGLE immagrant. Duh Illeagle is illeagle and against the law. #2 Arizonas law is based on the federal laws. (Almost exact) Arizona just upholds them. I know a lot of latinos and almost ALL of them do not want the illeagles here either. If they and myself have to live by rule of law. (and there are a lot of B.S. ones) than why can't others. So by your standards we should let all murderers out of jail if someone vouches for them or they are sorry for killing, maybe Rubio will write a dream act for them. Than they can all illeagles and criminals can live in your comunity so you can support them. Arizona is standing for the Constitution. Besides the state gives the feds power not the other way around. Ultimatly in a Republic the people are the #1 boss than city, state than fed. Just a little history lesson. Maybe you should try reading the constitution instead of misquoting it.
Toasty McGrath
Please again, Illegals violate our constituionsal right to be free of illegal invaders, we owe them nothing but a quick return to their 3rd world country.
Cayying a photo ID is not a problem for law abiding people, just for illegals. But, toasty, keep sticking up for the illegals and to hell with the rest of us. Liberals.....................................
You cant help TOASTY he has already been conditioned by the iinfiltration of the Fourth Riech administration and its education system- THE SOCIALIST GOVERMNENT RUN BIASED PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM.
Toasty--ONLY those who have guilty consciences have any need to fear being stopped by the cops.
I have been stopped for the "minor infraction" of no brake lights. PICKY? You bet!
and I was ABSOLUTELY Thrilled to run right to my dealer to get that fixed. Funny, I didn't WANT anyone plowing into me because they couldn't tell I was slowing down. And the cop who stopped me? ASKED for ID and proof of insurance. Because MO law says you cannot DRIVE without both! And for GOOD reasons!
I will never fear being stopped by the cops. IF I broke the law, MY BAD. If not, I have the option to fight a ticket.
And toasty, by appearance, I could BE Hispanic. In fact, I have some Hispanic blood IN me. I even SPEAK passable Spanish (USED to be fluent, years ago, when I actually LIVED in Mexico one summer, and Nicaragua another). And if I were ever STOPPED for any reason, and then asked for my ID, I'd say THANK you. Because I ALSO say 'thank you' to companies who ask to see my ID when I use my CREDIT Card. That is for MY protection! (ok, and also for the protection of the merchant/credit card company!)
MOmaid: and what would you do if you were in AZ and they asked you to prove that you were a US citizen because some local yahoo decided that he suspects you may not be a citizen. How would you like to be stopped EVERY TIME you decided to go for a drive, simply because the local yahoo cop decides to stop each person who "by appearance, could be an [illegal] hispanic". The only way the yahoo will know if you are legal or illegal or illegal is to stop you and you have to prove your citizenship. If you can't prove your citizenship, or right to be in the country, ON THE SPOT, then you get arrested.
Toasty is absolutely correct, this law was designed to chase hispanics out of AZ before they became a significant voting force and changed the politics in AZ. The law does not affect northern European white, english speaking persons, because the police haven't figured out a way to hassle them, YET.
IMO, all of these states which are requiring specific types of ID in order to vote should, at a bare minimum, be required to ISSUE those ID's at the time of voter registration and/or should be required to go to every registred voter and verify they have the ID before the law can take effect.
The dems need illegals to be able to vote for obummer
End allot of this mess ....
And make Guatemala our new southern border ....
Bigbenalaska-lol--but why on EARTH would we want Mexico as part of the US when its citizens have not done SQUAT to make that place be better?
But hey, at least the FENCE would already be partly complete. :{
Just take the country all the way down to Chile.
Of course, that won't stop the people who have overstayed their Visa's and suddenly become illegals, but hey, NOTHING will.
The Supreme court, Obama hates the word Supreme! he thinks he is SuPREME!, but if they support this and knock down Obamacare, an Obamanation, they will be able to checkmate Obama even IF he gets a second term!!! go Supreme court. Get your licks in while you can.
Our immigration laws here are the result of failure on the federal part to stem the tide of illegals flooding into the US. We have lost patience for the Obummer administration to actually get off their fat asses on Washington and actually do something out here.
If the feds aren't going to do anything, we will stand up and do what we think is right. There's a reason why we were called the Wild West.
"You can have my gun when you pry it from my cold dead hands" - Charlton Heston, late President of the NRA
Given that the feds have arrested and deported immigrants at record rates under President Obama, it's hard to keep from laughing at your comment.
Toasty McGrath
Toasty those that are on record for committing crimes and repeat numbers are a farce. The remaining illegals that suck us dry are the real problem. Deport them all now along with their anchor babies. El Paso Texas is full of these leeches.
Toasty...read comment 1.24 above. Then come back and let me know you're not one of the easily fooled.
That's a drop in the bucket. But you'll keep believing that horsesh!t.
That isn't true, TM. They're NOT deporting them at record rates. Where do you get your information?
READ AGAIN.....
Actually, Obama had them change their accounting methods so the deportation numbers look good.
He isn't deporting SQUAT !!
Hmmm, vote for Mitt, his party wants to send your cousin Juan back to Mexico! Yeah sure...hilarious
So.....we are going to the Supreme Court to debate if it okay to be ILLEGAL??? WTF??
If you don't live in Arizona or a border state, SHUT UP you ignorance is showing.
If you do live in a border state, come down to Tucson and visit the washes that used to be desert and now are landfills full of bottles, diapers, clothes and garbage from ILLEGALS!
Where is the debate and why????
I live in Tucson, Jim. And damned if I'm going to let the racists take away any more constitutional liberties to get the old person vote in Phoenix.
What do you call it when an illegal alien violates an American citizen's constitutional rights?
I'd call that "trying to change the subject."
Yeah, like the world's gonna change because some burnt out old toast says so.
lol...
thanks, Jim... you said it for me... I live in Havasu.....and I will repeat your words...if you don't live in Arizona....shut up....because you have NO idea what you're jabbering about....SB 1070 is almost word for word what our Federal laws say.....but, nobama, his dhs henchman (who was the governor of Arizona, for God's sake), won't enforce them.... nor will they allow us to....they'd rather have seives for borders so they can run their fast and furious hijinks.....please tell me, WHO are the terrorists???????!!!!!
Truth of the matter is, those of you who don't live on border states couldn't or wouldn't possibly believe what we go through. (Except Toasty, but then he's probably toasted all the time.) In order to debate the issue more intelligently, you need to read SB1070 and compare it to the Federal Immigration regulations and you will see for yourself that SB1070 does NOT overstep the bounds of the state.
Law enforcement has detained illegal immigrants stopped in the normal course of business for decades and turned them over to INS or BP to be processed by the feds UNLESS they have committed a crime resulting in arrest and prosecution. Since law enforcement are already required to uphold all state and federal laws (an oath they take when hired), SB1070 puts it in writing.
Those of you who continue to banter on about it being unconstitutional need to get better educated.
I happen to find it hillarious that the GOP is the group trying to enforce the latest round of jim crow laws while at the same time trying DESPERATELY, to court the hispanic vote.
This is the same group, that when the Democratic party, in the form of Harry Truman, JFK and LBJ gave votes, rights and integration to blacks, left the democratic party and became Republicans. And to this day the GOP can't understand why black voters will not vote for them. The long history of Southern lynching people who just want to vote and live just doesn't seem to sink in as a valid reason.
The history of the hate amoung the group of people who have now become the modern GOP is long and unfortunate.
The Democratic party speaks of hope and will and the future. The Republicans talk of taking America back, cuts, hate and money for the wealthy.
Is it any wonder that intelligent people don't like the Republican party.
BTW: the AZ law is not "word of word, just the same as federal law." In no part of federal regulations is there any direction that every federal law enforcement officer is required to determine the immigration status of any person stopped or detained, based on a "suspicion" that the person may be illegal. In no part of federal law is there direction prohibiting federal agency personnel from not enforcing immigration law. The only personnel directed to enforce immigration law are those in the immigration department.
In other words, this law made ALL AZ law enforcement persons, from the state attorney general to the Tuscon dog catcher immigration officers. AND they MUST, if there is any suspicion, determine the immigration status of whoever they are encountering, WITH NO DIRECTION of what amounts to suspicion.
I live in the Chicago area. We have one of the third highest populations of immigrants in the country. The only two areas that have a larger immigrant population also have larger populations, NY and LA.
This law is designed and meant to chase away hispanics, pure and simple. The AZ GOP knows that the hispanic population of AZ is growing and will soon exceed that of white, GOP voters. They intend to use this Jim Crow law to chase hispanics away.
Because of actions like this, the GOP is doomed, and it will fall apart within 10 years.
dirp:
federal officers CAN ask you for proof of your legal station in this country at will. they are not "required" to, but they can do it at will.
AZ is in a BAD SPOT, and i do not blame them for being tired of their legal citizens being killed for doing nothing more than living in AZ.
Jim I agree with you... it's easy for those whom dont have to face the issue that living with illegals brings. I love how the Hollywood crowd throws rocks down from the glass estates up in secluded neighborhoods. There is a huge direct burden in any area which has a lot of illegals - from crimes to expenses our country can no longer afford. We're the one's being affected and know what it entails to have them in America.
Sadly some, not all, you speak to them and they hate our country. Why are you here then ?
Toasty McGrath:
so you'd rather let persons entering this country ILLEGALLY tell you what to do.
and i'm racist because i want you to enter the country legally and not have my tax dollars support you and your anchor baby? if you enter illegally there should be NO WAY THAT KID IS A CITIZEN.
Totally agree. It's a system people take advantage of. That needs to change.
Yeah, who cares about that whole "Constitution" thing anyway, right Chloe? Don?
All you championing illegal rights obviously have never left the U.S. Go to Europe and try traveling around without your passport or Visa, you WILL be detained. Go to mexico and loose your paperwork, (which I was stupid enough to do) which I had the pleasure to experience. I was detained for hours, had to give them every last penny I had to be able to get on my flt home. It wasn't a fun experience at all. Oh if we in the U.S. could treat mexicans the way they treat us in their country, what a wonderful world it would be.
Only when it doesn't go your way. Right burnt toast?
When you set aside your feelings on the issue (whatever they may be) and really think about it: how much sense does it make that illegal aliens from one particular country are demanding that we MUST accomodate them? What other country lets this happen? This is an issue for the American people to decide at the voting booths- not other countries' demands.
The problem is you have legal immigrants now in power that want to break down the barriers so the rest of their family can come to our country. This is by far the biggest blunder President Obama has made in his term. I have no respect for a President that would prosecute a State for enacting laws that the Federal Govt won't enforce. All for the approval of the Hispanic population and more votes. It's a travesty against the American citizens and the American workers. Shame on you President Obama! An effective leader would have listened to the States needs for help and acted accordingly! The money we've wasted on the war in Afghanistan and Iraq would have been better spent taking care of our southern border where we pose a greater threat than radical Islam. Write me in on the ballot for President and I'd straighten all the problems out in 1 year! Our people would have jobs and a future! We need to vote every existing Senator and Representative out of office as soon as possible. The older members are too entrenched in their beliefs and unable to accomplish anything. The only way anyone gets a second term is if they can compromise and work for the betterment of our country not just their party! This is OUR country and we need to take it back!
Caffeine Queen:
Excellent point and the answer is NONE, not a one.
DmaninIowa:
Every Hispanic i know that is here legally doesn't want the illegals here either; in fact most of them are mighty pissed that the illegals get handed every da** thing, but they aren't raising their voices loudly enough and when those of us of European descent raise our voices in annoyance we are accused of being racist.
I agree with you that they all need to be voted out, who the hell told them they could give themselves raises and lifelong pensions?
You have to live near the border to understand just what Obama's "immigration policy" really means. I pay $3400.00/year for automobile insurance. Tucson PD and the Pima County Sheriff no longer investigate hit and run accidents unless there is a personal injury requiring an EMT response. Why? Becaust of the illegals. They all drive, none have insurance or any assets. They hit you they run and you have to pay to get your car fixed. My truck has been stolen twice out of my driveway and my home has been broken into more than once. The last time they drove a stolen pickup through the garage door, took what they wanted and ran 30 miles south back across the border. We know this because the truck they used was recovered abandoned 300 yards south of the border fence in Nogales Mexico. I have had it with these thieves and Governor Brewer signed that law just for the Citizens of Arizona. If the HNIC won't enforce the law we will and if he shows up in my front yard I will treat him just as I would any other undocumented immigrant.
Thanks for reminding me, bfitz. I live between Naco and Sierra Vista. In the past, there have been many stolen vehicles with illegals packed in them like sardines that have been stopped by BP, ADOT, local police or county sheriffs. If the vehicle pulls over, you can see people jumping out of it scattering in every direction. Sometimes they don't stop and cause huge accidents with serious injuries and even death. The worst one I can remember happened at the Hwy 90/92 Bypass by the north gate to Fort Huachuca. This is not a rare occasion.
BP used to have inspection stations set up on HWY 90 and HWY 80 on the way to I10 nearly every day and were able to detain some of the illegals who thought they might be able to get through there. Over the past couple of years, its a rare day when they are there to stop you. The "coyotes" began taking their groups through a portion of the Huachucas, cutting fences to get onto Fort Huachuca (an active military installation), and traveling through the fort on their northward journey. Military personnel on the fort are doing nothing more than repairing fences and allowing them to go on their way.
My question is: What if some of these illegals are terrorists? What if they're drug runners? Who is protecting us, the US Citizens? Who is responsible for allowing trespass on our own military installations? We have already been invaded and the news is being kept quiet by most of the media and the federal government. It's so bad here, we can't even venture into our own national forests (on US soil) for fear of becoming a statistic at the hands of the Mexican Cartel.
THIS IS NOT A RACIAL ISSUE, not all illegals are of hispanic descent! THIS IS AN ISSUE OF NATIONAL SECURITY AND SAFETY FOR ALL US CITIZENS!
The whole idea is ridiculous.....we came from England and wiped out all the original inhabitants of North America in the name of freedom from religious reign. Took over the country from the original inhabitants and now want to exclude the rest of the one's who were here before we got here in 1620 so that we can dominate againa...a never ending story!!! Stupidity reigns and also rains!!
What's that WE crap MY Ancestors were here !! And they weren't Mexican.
try the History Channel's "Story of Us" then you can get a real idea of what made out country be the America everyone wanted to live in... Quite interesting series.
Hey SumFuneh..........Are you smoking crack like the rest of the Republican Party? While Immigration remains a hot topic among the GOP party who only look to polarize this nation further rather than put forth any worthwhile policies. It's there way of taking the focus off the economy and the fact that most Americans are held hostage to the greedy s.o.b. oil companies who continue to gouge us at the pump every day. They want to strip and privatize everything so they can act like thieves and bypass every law on the books and make money tax free.
Wake up America. You elect Romney, you will get more dismantling of this country by greedy bastards who only care about the wealthy and big business tycoons. You will see more deregulation that will eliminate safeguards against credit card companies, banks, mortgage companies, less worker bargaining rights, raid on pension plans, bypassing environmental laws. These s.o.b.s want to take away our rights so they can support the hands that stuff wads of cash into their pockets. They include big oil, special interest groups, pacs that are now working over time to elect the empty suit Romney to the oval office. They will reduce taxes on the wealthy while decimating the middle class and below.
Time for term limits for Congress. Time for campaign fiance reform.
Do not be fooled by Romney's message that he is one of us. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Speaking of Immigration, someone should check Romney's citizenship to make sure he actually is one since there has been talk of him being born in Mexico.
It's great to see that there are some intelligent people making worthwhile comments today.
No one is suggesting we put an end to immigration but we are saying it must be done legally. If someone kicks down my front door, puts on my clothes, sits at my table and insists I feed him all he's going to get is two in the chest and one in the face.
Fair enough, if you apply all of the above to obama. Yes I said obama, I have no respect for this no experience, community organizer, race baiting divider.
For the record, I will NEVER vote for Romney. However, the immigration issue does worry me. I think it's totally and completely unfair that illegal immigrants live and work in this country with no repercussions whatsoever. It's just not right. It's ILLEGAL for a reason. There shouldn't be hand holding, special circumstances, turning blind eyes, etc. This is a real issue that needs to have consequences. And it has NOTHING to do with racism, ignorance, or some of the other ridiculous claims on this discussion board. People need to follow the damn rules! I don't understand how we can allow people who aren't citizens continue to blatantly disobey the law and take jobs from American people. In Europe, if you're an American student you can't get a job because they will ALWAYS hire citizens before an American exchange student. But here we are, doing the opposite! Businesses need to stop paying less to illegals and pay minimum wage to citizens. Period. There are way too many issues that make me despise Romney to ever vote conservative, but this issue is one that I hope Obama will stop and think about. He wants to be "fair"...well then let's start with immigration. Because that's not FAIR to HIS country, it's not fair to Americans!
Will these ILLEGALS be fined also if they don't buy Obummercare? Or, will healthcare just be free for them?
Romney and Rubio. Yep - The handsome rich guy and the handsome latino for VP. Makes you wanna go HMMM!
That's about what you dems did...slick little black racist/activist and a former senator that's as stupid as a stump.
"...slick little black racist/activist", shades of Archie Bunker!
I wonder if Romney will ever release his birth certificate. So far he has refused, just like his tax returns. Not sure what exactly he is hiding. This Mitt is one very mysterious fellow.
Original, long-form.
He will.
And then he will need to show his college records. Will he disclose them too,?
For crying out loud, Don, the man is afraid to show his TAX records...
The Federal Government has shown it's inability to regulate immigration and about 100 other things. The real problem in our country is the enormous growth of the Feds at the expense of the States. The "balance of power" between the Federal government and the State government worked until liberals realized they could control more if they tilted the power to Washington. Republicans aren't much better. What's really pathetic is that Mexico has much stricter immigration laws than we do and they actually enforce them.
Are you kidding? There has been a dramatic power transfer TO the states. The power of States has increased outrageously in the last twenty years. State government authority and power over individuals is at its highest level than we've ever seen, and it's come at the cost of constitutional liberties for individual citizens.
Toasty-Name 10 things (responsibilities) the Federal government has given back to the States over the past 40 years? Name 5? Name 2? Maybe you should read the Federalist Papers, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Clever how you framed your post there. The responsibilities haven't changed, but the powers have, and despite what the Teabaggers insist, it's clearly evident that the States have gained unconscionable power over the lives of their citizens, in direct opposition to the Constitutional limitations you so claim to be familiar with. And this isn't just in the last year or so with the massive Tea Party intrusion on constitutional liberties, this is a trend that has been going on for at least twenty years. Probably more.
States are losing power???? Several States are now petitioning the Federal Government to turn over all federal lands within their borders to the states themselves arguing that they, the states, would be better stewards of the land. Of course the states convienently ignore two facts 1) The land belongs to ALL the citizens of the US, and 2) The states can't afford to manage and maintain these lands. Talk about cheeky!
Go scam someone else
Not to mention the states involved intend to turn those lands into corporate playgrounds, for state profit, but that's besides the point.
No Toasty, there has been a huge imposition of RESPONSIBILITIES dumped on the state without the means to fullfill those responsiblities. Personally, I think the states are close to rebellion. How dare Washington claim immigration preemption and then abandon enforcement. Unnecessary foreign wars and prostitutes is what I think of when I think of Federal behavior.
Much, if not all of Arizona's law will be ruled constitutional insofar as states have the legislative power to protect the citizens and interests of their respective states, especially since the federal government has refused to uphold the law as it was written and passed by Congress and signed by the president. The precedent of the federal and state law enforcement working in tandem was established long ago as in the cases of bank robbery, kidnapping, interstate crime and even illegal immigration.............Laws are not written to be optional or tweaked to fit an ideology............Obama should never have scolded the Supreme court in front of a world audience as he did in his state of the union address over the Citizens United ruling........
That mistake is going to kill Obama's health care act also
looking at earlier rulings the whole law will be upheld because the state has a right to protect itself and since the federal goverment refuses to follow its own laws then the state is right to protect its people.
That is where you are wrong, judges and lawyers do that everyday.
Toasty,
I wish all these leftist posters could spend a night in our fair city out there in the desert in one of those wahes. It would no doubt change some minds...
Or in my brother's backyear in Yuma, where he has had MANY illegals come tramping thru and a couple of them threatened him!! THIS HAS TO STOP! I am not a big fan of Romney BUT after I heard he will enforce the laws such as this, He's got my vote!