Monday, June 25, 2012

Immigration Laws.......a question

From THIS ARTICLE: " The Supreme Court upheld a key part of Arizona's tough anti-illegal immigration law in a 5-3 decision on Monday that allows police officers to ask about immigration status during stops. That part of the law, which never went into effect because of court challenges, will now immediately be enforced in Arizona. Other parts of the law, including a provision that made it a state crime for illegal immigrants to seek work, will remain blocked, as the justices affirmed the federal government's supremacy over immigration policy."
Also, "The law made it a state crime for illegal immigrants to seek work or fail to carry proper immigration papers."

So, what DOES the Federal Government do to protect America from illegal immigration?  Can someone help me out here? 

UPDATE:  (AP) — Mitt Romney on Monday said states have a duty and a right to secure their borders even as he called for a bipartisan national immigration strategy.
Z: I'm not sure AP had to say "even as he called for ..." as if the states and the national immigration strategies wouldn't be best if working together, but I guess "even as he.." make him sound like a hypocrite, so the author, Jack Gillum, got his point across :-)


  • Yes, if it catches illegal immigrants.
  • No, it's too often done irresponsibly.  23%
SO, is our government representing the majority?  or......No, a Yahoo poll isn't 'gospel', but...



Bloviating Zeppelin said...

In the 80s, they used to. USBP would come by our jails daily to collect illegals.

Today, they quake in fear for labeling and now, mostly, want the VOTES.

Simple as that.


Bob said...

It is hard to understand why the Supremes gets involved when a state tries to protect its citizens. There is no jurisdictional problem with throwing illegals back to Mexico, whether the Federal Government does or does not do its job.

Heck, they should both be able to stop anybody for probable cause, search their background, and make a determination on their immigration status. The Feds do it, anyway, as they guard the border, don't they? If they don't they are not doing their job.

Z said...

Bob, frankly, I'm not sure WHAT the Feds are doing at the borders. I suppose they're guarding something.....the media likes to report that Obama's deported more than any other president. I don't know how or where they get the deportees FROM to deport, do you? I don't see raids happening anymore, as BZ described.

Years ago, here in LA, you couldn't get some Hispanics to look at you in the eye as they passed and you figured their illegal from their demeanor; today, there's nothing like that. THey're here and defiantly here.

Silverfiddle said...

Z: California is spilling over with illegal aliens because your liberal government invites them in and writes laws to protect them. California is a sanctuary state.

This issue is a political football that benefits both sides, and all politicians should be ashamed of themselves for selling our sovereignty and perpetuating a giant human rights abuse.

Z said... what's the FED doing in other states?

"Sanctuary STate" might as well be "ILLEGAL state" 'sanctuaries' could stand over LAWS is beyond me..But WHAT laws is my question?

as for the giant human rights abuse issue, I think it's WE who are having our human rights abused as I see hospitals closing here and we all see millions of tax dollars sent back to MX.

We want only LEGAL immigration and our politicians of all sides have caved, no doubt about it.

How much of an issue do you feel the controversy of "nobody else will pick our vegetables, etc" takes part in this?
It did take a big part years ago, and Europe, too, started its huge influx of immigration through workers for Peugeot in France, etc...they started legally and with fixed limits in coming here but then intermarried, etc., and they couldn't send them back. Same thing happened in Germany.

ALL Western societies today are suffering financially for this....

Ducky's here said...

Doing nothing much in Massachusetts.

Charlestown is loaded with illegal Irish getting no show hack jobs from the Hibernian crooks in Suffolk county.

Elmers Brother said...

From the squad size automatic gun toting illegals running amok twenty miles from my house to the Dept of Ag telling my farm owning family to ignore the law, I'd say the Feds aren't doing much at all.

Z said...

Elbro, they mean 'ignore the law' and let the illegals swarm?

How's this helping AMerica? man.

Elmers Brother said...

Some workers IDs are obvious fakes. The Dept. of AG told my SIL not to photocopy those IDs then they (my B and SIL) cannot be held accountable for them

viburnum said...

SF: "California is spilling over with illegal aliens because your liberal government invites them in and writes laws to protect them. California is a sanctuary state."

It may be the case that the part of today's decision that struck down some provisions of Arizona's law on the grounds of preemption of Federal authority, could be turned on the 'sanctuary' statutes in California and elsewhere. Might at least be worth looking into. After all. Why would it matter why they're 'preemptive'?

Z said...

Viburnum, how 'turned on?'...I'm not reading you.


Z said...

By the way..

did you all see the UPDATE I added...showing how many people thought that asking for ID is the RIGHT thing to do? It floored me...SEVENTY-SEVEN PERCENT!!?

Liberalmann said...

Under Obama, immigration has slowed to a trickle and he's deported far more than Bush. AZ still has their racist 'show me your papers' law intact.

Ducky's here said...

Allowing police to question but do nothing else pretty much guts this and just gives them a tool for harassment.

Must be an activist judge involved somewhere.

Elmers Brother said...

Why else would you need a drivers license.

Elmers Brother said...

Is The federal government Racist When it Asks For your id?

Elmers Brother said...

Under Obama, immigration has slowed to a trickle and he's deported far more than Bush. AZ still has their racist 'show me your papers' law intact.

You're right...the economy is so bad even the illegal aliens can't find work.

As for your meme about deportations...I'd think twice. Note ICE's own chart.

Elmers Brother said...

See for yourself

Elmers Brother said...

Maybe you could explain how suspending enforcement causes deportations to go up?

Pris said...

""Arizona may have under­standable frustrations with the problems caused by illegal immigration while that process continues, but the State may not pursue policies that undermine federal law,"" Kennedy wrote in the opinion's conclusion.

Krauthammer made the point today, that Arizona was not undermining federal law, it was undermining Obama policy. A huge difference!

Ducky, if there are illegal Irish, they should be deported as well!

Law and Order Teacher said...

I like the provision that the police can inquire as to their status as a result of another violation. As a cop I would not want to try to articulate about an ambiguous law. This is cut and dry and a former cop, it's nice that everyone knows the law you're enforcing. I think it's a good win for law enforcement.

Of course, our friends on the left will see it as a tool to hassle poor people, minorities, criminals etc. In other words, Dem voters.

Z said...

Pris, you said "but the State may not pursue policies that undermine federal law,"" Kennedy wrote in the opinion's conclusion.

Krauthammer made the point today, that Arizona was not undermining federal law, it was undermining Obama policy. A huge difference!"

Sounds like Kennedy's turning into a progressive activist judge?

Law & Order...better than just walking up to someone and asking for papers, right?

We either protect and defend our laws or we don't. We aren't anymore.

Elbro; good point...many are leaving because Obama's given them no choice in his failure to create jobs.

viburnum said...

Z:" how 'turned on?'...I'm not reading you."

The SCOTUS rationale for striking down the parts of the AZ law it did was that it encroached on an area that is strictly the province of the Federal government.

If a state actively working to remove illegals is infringing on Federal authority, isn't a state that is actively attempting to harbor them doing the same?

Of course we'll probably have to wait for the next Attorney General to pursue that line of reasoning.

viburnum said...

Ducky: "Must be an activist judge involved somewhere."

KENNEDY, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and GINSBURG, BREYER, and SOTOMAYOR, JJ., joined.

Three by my count.

Elmers Brother said...

L and O the link that I shared explains that the feds will no longer cooperate with local law enforcement in AZ when it comes to immigration arrests. The Feds are still not gonna deport, its still catch and release.

Z said...

I think Scalia has a point:

"The president said at a news conference that the new program is 'the right thing to do' in light of Congress's failure to pass the administra­tion's proposed revision of the Immigration Act," Scalia, a Reagan appointee, wrote in his dissent. "Perhaps it is, though Arizona may not think so. But to say, as the Court does, that Arizona contradicts federal law by enforc­ing applications of the Immigration Act that the President declines to enforce boggles the mind."

Scalia went on to write:

Arizona bears the brunt of the country's illegal immigration problem. Its citizens feel themselves under siege by large numbers of illegal immigrants who invade their property, strain their social services, and even place their lives in jeopardy. Federal officials have been unable to remedy the problem,and indeed have recently shown that they are unwilling to do so. Thousands of Arizona's estimated 400,000 illegal immigrants—including not just children but men and women under 30—are now assured immunity from en­forcement, and will be able to compete openly with Ari­zona citizens for employment."

More here:

worth reading.

I share his views on AZ vs's NUTS.

Viburnum...let's not blind anybody by FACTS :-)

Liberalmann just commented at my post informing us about the fact that Obama's people had the silverware removed at a Latino dinner before he came out...he's saying FOX made it up. Of course, there is VIDEO and QUOTES, but............what's WITh these people? !!!! :-)

Z said...

Elbro, which has to deter AZ's police from arresting; what's the point of going through the paperwork?

Elmers Brother said...

Eexactly. From the link:

Federal officials said they’ll still perform the checks as required by law but will respond only when someone has a felony conviction on his or her record. Absent that, ICE will tell the local police to release the person.

Z said... the Fed won that point, too.

Sort of like when Obama says, about his health care boondoggle "you'll be able to keep your own insurace"
yes, except it won't BE THERE, they won't be able to stay open.

The COPS can ARREST per SCOTUS, but they won' point.

The Obama thugs' calculations seem to be working, don't they.

Elmers Brother said...

An estimated 17% of illegals have a felonious criminal record. You do the math.

viburnum said...

Keep in mind as well that the dissenting opinions by Scalia, Thomas, and Alito are based on striking down ANY of the provisions of the AZ law, effectively making the vote for what part of it was upheld 8-0

Another shutout.

Z said...

The Fed gov't is now giving people in AZ a hot line phone number to report police abuse.

You know, growing up, I used to think a president could NEVER be a KING here because, if anybody went too far, the other side had every right to stop it and just quote THE LAWS.
Doesn't seem like that's quite the situation.

I feel like we're giving our country away and even those who are trying to fight for the law, like in Fast and Furious are just maligned instead of being supported...wouldn't you think people would say "ya, why hasn't he turned everything in?" but, the Left's not only got an agenda of progressive (if you can call socialism that) plans but an agenda against sanity..

Law and Order Teacher said...

This isn't about anything other than a president acting with impunity. The president, the executive branch, has no constitutional right to selectively enforce laws. That's why I get so incensed when leftist or puppet police chiefs take upon themselves to ignore laws they don't want to enforce.

The police are in the executive branch and they abrogate their duty to refuse to enforce laws when they illegal aliens. Prosecutorial discretion is one thing, refusing to enforce laws is quite another.

I thought until recently that Andrew Jackson was the only president to thumb his nose at the Supreme Court and FDR was slapped down when he tried to pack the court. BO makes them look like a slackers.

This is what happens when the press doesn't serve its first amendment responsibility to be a watchdog. A shameful display by an out-of-control president and a lap dog media.

Law and Order Teacher said...

That sentence should have read "they abrogate their duty when they refuse to arrest illegal aliens." It's getting late. Sorry.

Z said...

Law and Order, you are so right about the MEDIA.
If we had even a curious media (anybody interested in getting to the truth even if it IS a liberal they're investigating), we'd never have anything like what's happening now.
Obama's got it MADE IN THE SHADE!

Also, I was just watching the news and they said SCOTUS says the police "can arrest illegals without a warrant"

Since when do we need a warrant to arrest a law breaker? A policeman doesn't need a warrant to arrest a burglar, or a murderer, or a shop lifter.
That "without a warrant" seems misleading to me...what am I not getting here?
The law says that IF the illegal is picked up for a traffic violation or anything ... the cops can ask to see their ID. A WARRANT is talked about? WHY? They're not entering anybody's house! THEN you need a warrant, I understand that.

Anonymous said...

I would be much happier to see Arizona law confine its focus to those who provide the magnets, drawing forth the illegal immigrants. I am speaking of laws that prohibit cities from refusing to obey state or federal law. I am speaking of employers who hire illegal aliens, rather than arresting illegal aliens for doing little more than feed their families. I am talking about politicians who pass laws that demand the expenditure of public money to “take care of” people who have no legal basis for being here in the first place. Why do you think these people are here? Is it because there are great opportunities in their home country? No … it is because our politicians and citizens are inept.


Z said...

Hi, Louie, you're right, but if they can't get a job in AZ, they just move to CA or New Jersey! Or anywhere!

I just don't understand a country like ours who doesn't feel keeping borders properly closed and only open to legal immigrants ... how did this happen?

I heard only 14 or 17% of America is Hispanic...and Obama needs them badly, but that's not going to help him win.
We know this is entirely about politics, and it's scary to think all politicians put that before the AMerican people.

Honestly, I don't believe someone like Marco Rubio or Paul Ryan does that...I really don't.

Lisa said...

Hey I will be back tomorrow. My mom is in the hospital with an foot infection and they have her on an IV. It got worse. They thinks it's a bacterial infection. They found a small opening between her toes that they think it came in through.
Another lost day of work.
She'll be ok after this course of treatments.
I left my house at 1:30 pm and got back home at 12;00 AM.

They Say/We Say said...

A Texas Law Professor said today on the radio that the Az law was struck down because it was mirrored of Fed Law, States can't do Fed Law.
As good as it seems to take up where the Feds left off, just can't enforce Fed Law.
The good part is that the Supreme Court kicked the can on down the road-and maybe WAKE Up the People to force the Congress to take this to the next level.
What I can gleam from the Part not struck down is that the Feds will not respond to the request from the Az Law Officers Phone Calls.
Which will mean that if caught by commenting a crime and found to be illegal-and the Feds not responding; the illegals detained----will or could be held indefinitely? Hope So, that would wake up the People.

Lisa said...

what is so ridiculous is that we should;d even be having this issue. Why is it the US.S is the only country who doesn't have to enforce immigration laws?
It's like everyone is afraid to admit what a huge problem this s and how much of a bigger problem this is going to be if we don't start getting serious.
There was a protest in front of the supreme court yesterday and this Hispanic girl had a sign that said "I will not self Deport"
I am sure she was paid.
Did you hear Obama put up a website where people in AZ can report the cops for violation o civil rights?
This guy is just sickening. He doesn't love this country,he proves it every day.

Z said...

Lisa, I'm so sorry! I hope she's doing really well on the course of treatment and recovers quickly!

TS/WS...the trouble is, the Feds "leave off" before protecting the borders. But, that's interesting input from the prof, thanks. That's one angle I haven't heard.
Your question is a good one; I have no idea.
I do know the Feds implemented a hot line for illegals to call in and report any of what they consider 'abuse'...
But the Feds won't take calls from AZ's cops saying "please help us with this guy, he committed a felony and we need to know his immigration standing."

dial tonnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnne

Z said...

Lisa! welcome back :-)

DITTO to everything you said..!!

Law and Order Teacher said...

You do actually need a warrant to arrest, but you can physically arrest someone based on probable cause and hold them until a warrant charges them and they're either released by a judge or held for trial.

When you get a ticket that's an affidavit which charges you with an offense. So if the police stop someone on probable cause that they committed a crime they can check their status. The news media is untrustworthy in criminal matters because few of them do their homework. They usually depend on unreliable information of anti-police sources.

I read where Brewer told the police in AZ to enforce the law. We'll see if departments below state level follow on. If a municipality has "home rule" they call their own tune.

Z said...

L&W, but if they pull me over for a speeding violation, they didn't have to have a warrant, right?
Explain that...I"m not sure how this works even after your explanation! :-) You mean you can make the arrest but then have to do some kind of check and that acts as a warrant, or??
You don't have to call in "We have a man with a knife at his wife's throat and we want to arrest before he slices, PLEASE give us a warrant quick so she won't DIE!" Right~?