Page 5 of 29 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 281

Thread: Judge blocks part of controversial Arizona immigration law

  1. #41
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: Judge blocks part of controversial Arizona immigration law

    Moderator's Warning:
    Judge blocks part of controversial Arizona immigration lawMembers should refrain from insults.

  2. #42
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:47 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,585

    Re: Judge blocks part of controversial Arizona immigration law

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    I think we need to step back and take a look at what the ruling was on the injunction before we get any deeper into the misinformation parade.

    1. From what I just heard the injunction although it stops police from checking immigration documents when a traffic stop occurs, however, it still can, should, and will happen for any arrest situation.

    2. The appeal will continue to the 9th circuit, however this in no doubt a blow to AZ.

    3. and lastly, we wouldn't be having this discussion if Obama and the demo's would just take care of our immigration question by first, stopping the flow of illegals streaming across, instead of pandering to them as a future voting block.


    j-mac
    ONe of the more important things to remember is that no decisions have been made about the constitutionality of anything.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  3. #43
    Cynical Optimist
    jambalaya's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Last Seen
    11-28-12 @ 05:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    2,481

    Re: Judge blocks part of controversial Arizona immigration law

    Quote Originally Posted by The Dane View Post
    Bull****, a judge disagrees with your racist based policies, its against the law and got struck down.
    I think what she is saying is that it could possibly lead to racial profiling. So she is not actually ruling on something that is actually illegal. In other words you can't obtain the immigrant status of someone accept by accident or if they volunteer the information. You can't acually suspect someone and do any investigation. Priceless!

  4. #44
    Advisor Rightwingnutjob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    09-05-10 @ 04:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    420

    Re: Judge blocks part of controversial Arizona immigration law

    The law is close to the federal law already in terms of wording. There is nothing racist about pulling someone over.

    Here's how the scenario would play out:

    An officer sees a car speeding and pulls him over. He approaches the driver door and says, "could I see your license and registration please?"
    The driver has no license (which has your address on it) and may or may not have registration. Alarm bells are going off inside the officers head, "Hey this guy doesn't have a license, I wonder if he has any legal form of I.D."

    The officer asks, "do you have some sort of I.D. on you?"
    The personal who was pulled over so the officer brings him down to the station for driving without a license. Going through records at the station he discovers the person is an illegal immigrant from Mexico, Canada, Australia, England, Sweden, WHEREVER.

    Must be racist, right?

    GIVE ME A BREAK!! There is nothing racist about asking for someone's license when they are pulled over. There is nothing racist about asking for some I.D. when you catch someone committing any crime.

  5. #45
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Judge blocks part of controversial Arizona immigration law

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    Political theater and sides being drawn isn't a sufficient reason for striking down a law. So, again, if it's meaningless -- what's the problem?
    Actually, striking it down means nothing. Looking like you're fighting it means everything. Political theater. The law itself means nothing. Again, we have the laws on the books to tackle the problem. We simply don't have the will to.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  6. #46
    Hippie Hater
    texmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Dallas TEXAS
    Last Seen
    08-20-15 @ 01:17 AM
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    3,969

    Re: Judge blocks part of controversial Arizona immigration law

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Actually, striking it down means nothing. Looking like you're fighting it means everything. Political theater. The law itself means nothing. Again, we have the laws on the books to tackle the problem. We simply don't have the will to.
    The problem is she is ignoring legal precident for states to write their own laws against illegals

    Gonzales v. City of Peoria, There is nothing inherent in that specific enforcement activity that conflicts with federal regulatory interests. Federal and local enforcement have identical purposes--the prevention of the misdemeanor or felony of illegal entry. The subject matter of the regulation thus does not require us to find that state enforcement is preempted....""A state trooper has general investigatory authority to inquire into possible immigration violations. Moreover, the trooper's question about the green card was reasonable under the circumstances, and thus lawful."

    United States v. Vasquez- Alvarez, 176 F.3rd 1294. 1999: United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit

    "In particular, the United States observes this court has long held that state and local law enforcement officers are empowered to arrest for violations of federal law, as long as such arrest is authorized by state law.

    United States v. Santana-Garcia
    , 264 F.3rd 1188. 2001: United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit

    "We noted just recently that state law enforcement officers within the Tenth Circuit "have the general authority to investigate and make arrests for violations of federal immigration laws,"

    United States v. Rodriguez-Arreola

    Rodriguez does not have Fourth Amendment rights to assert because he was an illegal alien.

    Muehler v. Mena

    The court also held the officers had the right to question her citizenship status: "Mena’s detention was, under Summers, plainly permissible. [1]An officer's authority to detain incident to a search is categorical; it does not depend on the “quantum of proof justifying detention or the extent of the intrusion to be imposed by the seizure.” Id., at 705, n. 19. Thus, Mena’s detention for the duration of the search was reasonable under Summers because a warrant existed to search 1363 Patricia Avenue and she was an occupant of that address at the time of the search."


    And those are just a few. She ignored all of this legal precedence and became a political activist instead an interpreter of the law.
    Last edited by texmaster; 07-28-10 at 03:52 PM.
    Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

    John Adams

  7. #47
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Judge blocks part of controversial Arizona immigration law

    Quote Originally Posted by texmaster View Post
    The problem is she is ignoring legal precident for states to write their own laws against illegals

    Gonzales v. City of Peoria, There is nothing inherent in that specific enforcement activity that conflicts with federal regulatory interests. Federal and local enforcement have identical purposes--the prevention of the misdemeanor or felony of illegal entry. The subject matter of the regulation thus does not require us to find that state enforcement is preempted....""A state trooper has general investigatory authority to inquire into possible immigration violations. Moreover, the trooper's question about the green card was reasonable under the circumstances, and thus lawful."

    [i]United States v. Vasquez- Alvarez, 176 F.3rd 1294. 1999: United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit

    "In particular, the United States observes this court has long held that state and local law enforcement officers are empowered to arrest for violations of federal law, as long as such arrest is authorized by state law.

    United States v. Santana-Garcia
    , 264 F.3rd 1188. 2001: United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit

    "We noted just recently that state law enforcement officers within the Tenth Circuit "have the general authority to investigate and make arrests for violations of federal immigration laws,"

    United States v. Rodriguez-Arreola

    Rodriguez does not have Fourth Amendment rights to assert because he was an illegal alien.

    Muehler v. Mena

    The court also held the officers had the right to question her citizenship status: "Mena’s detention was, under Summers, plainly permissible. [1]An officer's authority to detain incident to a search is categorical; it does not depend on the “quantum of proof justifying detention or the extent of the intrusion to be imposed by the seizure.” Id., at 705, n. 19. Thus, Mena’s detention for the duration of the search was reasonable under Summers because a warrant existed to search 1363 Patricia Avenue and she was an occupant of that address at the time of the search."

    And those are just a few. She ignored alll of thise legal precendence and became a political activist instead an interpreter of the law.
    I'm not a lawyer, and neither are you. You believe she is ignoring, but you may well be wrong. What site did you grab these from?

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  8. #48
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:47 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,585

    Re: Judge blocks part of controversial Arizona immigration law

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Actually, striking it down means nothing. Looking like you're fighting it means everything. Political theater. The law itself means nothing. Again, we have the laws on the books to tackle the problem. We simply don't have the will to.
    Then what's the problem with the AZ law? If it's meaningless, so meaningless that striking it down means nothing, then it can't be a problem.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  9. #49
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Judge blocks part of controversial Arizona immigration law

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    Then what's the problem with the AZ law? If it's meaningless, so meaningless that striking it down means nothing, then it can't be a problem.
    It is itself theater. It does nothing. It is only designed to hype the issue and garner votes. So, it creates the stage for both sides to play fight, thus gardnering their supporters. but in the end, no matter who wins any legal battles, ten years from now, nothing will have changed.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  10. #50
    Student The Dane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    08-01-10 @ 07:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    253

    Re: Judge blocks part of controversial Arizona immigration law

    B. FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY
    21 OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS
    22 STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS
    23 UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE,
    24 WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE
    25 PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
    26 PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).
    Yeah, anyone want to explain what "a reasonable suspicion exists that person is an alien" means?
    Ever have to dance with the devil in the pale moonlight?
    Scales in the grass but the scales don't move right?

Page 5 of 29 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... 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
  •