Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 24

Thread: Arizona immigration law 101: seven lawsuits, and counting

  1. #1
    Student The Dane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    08-01-10 @ 07:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    253

    Arizona immigration law 101: seven lawsuits, and counting

    A federal judge on Thursday hears two lawsuits challenging the tough Arizona immigration law, including the one filed by the Obama administration. Here's a look at the law and the seven cases against it.
    United States v. State of Arizona (filed July 6). The US brought suit against Arizona, arguing that the state law is preempted by federal law and violates the supremacy clause of the US Constitution. It was scheduled to be heard Thursday.
    So what do the tea party's have to say about this? If Arizona is found to be violating the constitution, how bad will it look for them to be in outrage when this law gets struck down by the Federal government (which it will).

    You're not going to beat Obama at his own game, constitutional law.

    http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politic...s-and-counting
    Ever have to dance with the devil in the pale moonlight?
    Scales in the grass but the scales don't move right?

  2. #2
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: Arizona immigration law 101: seven lawsuits, and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by The Dane View Post
    So what do the tea party's have to say about this? If Arizona is found to be violating the constitution, how bad will it look for them to be in outrage when this law gets struck down by the Federal government (which it will).

    You're not going to beat Obama at his own game, constitutional law.

    Arizona immigration law 101: seven lawsuits, and counting - CSMonitor.com
    Obama, as has been shown here on this forum, using his own words, has very little respect for the Constitution, so it's no surprise that Obama has ordered a lawsuit against Az, and that it's on the flase grounds of claiming the Az law is Unconstitutional is merely more Proof Obama's understanding of the Consitution is highly suspect to say the least.

    Az 7, Progreessive entities out to overturn the law 0. That's gonna be the score by the time SCOTUS get's this.
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



  3. #3
    Student The Dane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    08-01-10 @ 07:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    253

    Re: Arizona immigration law 101: seven lawsuits, and counting

    Thanks for all those useful points and factual, logical arguments to back up your sound and well thought out premise.
    Ever have to dance with the devil in the pale moonlight?
    Scales in the grass but the scales don't move right?

  4. #4
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: Arizona immigration law 101: seven lawsuits, and counting

    From your link:
    United States v. State of Arizona (filed July 6). The US brought suit against Arizona, arguing that the state law is preempted by federal law and violates the supremacy clause of the US Constitution. It was scheduled to be heard Thursday.
    To 'lil ole Maggie, it sounds like they're on very thin ice here. But that doesn't appear to be the opinion of many legal experts. Why am I not surprised that common sense has absolutely no place in the law?

    So, if the Federal government decided to do a piss-poor job of enforcing Federal drug laws or anti-discrimination laws, States are powerless?
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  5. #5
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: Arizona immigration law 101: seven lawsuits, and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by The Dane View Post
    Thanks for all those useful points and factual, logical arguments to back up your sound and well thought out premise.
    As opposed to your stance that Obama is an "expert" on the Constitution, yet his own words and beliefs belie this expertise?
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



  6. #6
    Student The Dane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    08-01-10 @ 07:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    253

    Re: Arizona immigration law 101: seven lawsuits, and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    As opposed to your stance that Obama is an "expert" on the Constitution, yet his own words and beliefs belie this expertise?
    He was a professor of constitutional law at University of Chicago for 12 years. Yeah, I'd say he's an expert. I don't know how you can just deny reality here. He is a well established expert, you are not.
    Ever have to dance with the devil in the pale moonlight?
    Scales in the grass but the scales don't move right?

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    In your dreams...
    Last Seen
    05-29-12 @ 02:53 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,621

    Re: Arizona immigration law 101: seven lawsuits, and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    Obama, as has been shown here on this forum, using his own words, has very little respect for the Constitution...
    Can you link me to where this was said or discussed?

  8. #8
    Advisor BCR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Heart of Dixie
    Last Seen
    12-06-13 @ 04:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    598

    Re: Arizona immigration law 101: seven lawsuits, and counting

    Obama hasn't show any respect for the constitution??? just like how conservatives completely disregard the constitution when it comes to prayer in school and wanting to thwart the attempts to build a mosque two blocks away from ground zero?

  9. #9
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: Arizona immigration law 101: seven lawsuits, and counting

    If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed people, so that now I would have the right to vote. I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it I’d be OK

    But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it's been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can't do to you. Says what the federal government can't do to you, but doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf.

    And that hasn't shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court-focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that.


    Obama finds himself compelled "to side with Justice Breyer's view of the Constitution--that it is not a static but rather a living document, and must be read in the context of an ever-changing world." But no one disputes that the Constitution "must be read," and applied, "in the context of an ever-changing world." The central question of the last several decades is, rather, whether it is legitimate for judges to alter the Constitution's meaning willy-nilly--in particular, whether judges have unconstrained authority to invent new constitutional rights to suit their views of what changing times require. The cliché invoked by Obama of a "living" Constitution disguises the fact that the entrenchment of leftist policy preferences as constitutional rights deprives the political processes of the very adaptability that Breyer and company pretend to favor. As Scalia has put it, "the reality of the matter is that, generally speaking, devotees of The Living Constitution do not seek to facilitate social change but to prevent it."

    And so on for all of Obama's other deceptive rhetoric in his chapter on "Our Constitution" in The Audacity of Hope, including his galling claim to be "left then with Lincoln" in their supposed common understanding of the Constitution. On judicial nominations, Obama brazenly contends that "Democrats used the filibuster sparingly in George Bush's first term: Of the President's two-hundred-plus judicial nominees, only ten were prevented from getting to the floor for an up-or-down vote." What Obama's casting conveniently obscures from the trusting reader is that these filibusters were unprecedented in the history of the Senate. Obama even pretends that it's obvious that Republicans would resort to the filibuster "if the situations were reversed." But the best evidence refutes Obama: There were only four votes on cloture--on proceeding to a final vote on confirmation--on judicial nominations during the Clinton administration. All four were supported by Republican leadership, and none received more than 14 negative votes from Republican senators.

    In the end, an examination of Obama's record and rhetoric discloses the stuff he is made of--his own constitution. Beneath the congeniality and charisma lies a leftist partisan who will readily resort to sly deceptions to advance his agenda of liberal judicial activism. Given the likelihood of so many changes in the membership of the Supreme Court over the next eight years, it is particularly important that voters this November recognize the real Obama.
    Obama's Constitution | The Weekly Standard
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



  10. #10
    Sage
    mike2810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    arizona
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    15,022

    Re: Arizona immigration law 101: seven lawsuits, and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by The Dane View Post
    Thanks for all those useful points and factual, logical arguments to back up your sound and well thought out premise.
    and what useful points and factual / logical arguments have you provided to back up your stance, other than stating Obama knows Constitutional law? First, did Obama react to 1070 without fully reading the law? Did Holder react before he or his staff fully read the law? I won't second guess the courts, but I would bet Az will survive most if not all rulings by the SC.
    "I can explain it to you but, I can't understand it for you"

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •