• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Court denies request for expedited hearing on Arizona immigration law

Exactly how do you purport to do that latter? There are an estimated 15 million people that are not here legally. How do you propose to deal with that? Once again, the Conservs have such a simplistic / unrealistic handle on the problems affecting this country. I am not sure what is worse: when the party just says no without offering alternatives or when the party actually opens its mouth and you realize how ridiculous their alternatives actually are.

Nothing unrealistic about the realization that if enough employers of these invaders are fined and jailed, the other employers will get the picture and the invaders won't have any jobs.

No jobs means no rent payments.

No rent payments means no roof.

No roof means "goin' back home", just like many of the Invaders in Arizona are doing.

You have noticed the invaders are leaving Arizona like rats fleeing a cooling camel corpse, haven't you? The rest of us have. Funny effect that, for a law that hasn't even been enforced yet. Just wait until the Robert's court properly declares the provisions of the law Constitutional and other states rush to copy it. That will put huge pressures on the remaining states to follow suit, too.

Again, the solution is that simple. It's called "enforce existing law". Which all that SB1070 allows Arizona police to do, and nothing more than that.
 
Nobody is saying that Arizona does not have the right to protect its border, they just cant ignore my rights as a free citizen to do so. We wont let them. We will not tolerate treating us and our kids as second class citizens.

And what right of yours is being violated?
 
Yes, there are Asian and even white illegals as well, ...

...the mythical non-hispanic illegals.

Make up your mind.

There either ARE non-hispanic illegals or they're "mythical". You said both. They can't both exist and not exist.

Since they do exist, it's clear the Arizona bill is as applicable to them as to the hispanics.
 
Exactly how do you purport to do that latter? There are an estimated 15 million people that are not here legally. How do you propose to deal with that? Once again, the Conservs have such a simplistic / unrealistic handle on the problems affecting this country. I am not sure what is worse: when the party just says no without offering alternatives or when the party actually opens its mouth and you realize how ridiculous their alternatives actually are.

Didn't say it wouldn't be easy. However, does the fact that it isn't easy mean you should just give up the ship and quit? Have YOU ever tried something that was tough, or did you just give up and quit because it is too tough. Are you one to whine... aaauuugghhh I can't to that, it's too tough... So, I should give my my goal of finishing a full Ironman Triathlon because it is too tough for a 40-year-old??? Give me a break... That isn't the spirit that made America great... This law is ONE step... ONE part of what needs to be done... Yes, it would be better to have a comprehensive law from Washington, but in absense of that, the State of Arizona has the right and OBLIGATION to protect its citizens... The federal government is not only engaging in criminal neglect, but it is now engaging in criminal INTERFERENCE with Arizona's efforts to protect its citizens.
 
Man, I'm NOT against all aspects of sb1070, but that's just silly. This is not "the left playing the race card", that race card got dealt on the damned flop. Yes, there are Asian and even white illegals as well, but to suggest that this bill was not created because of and is not aimed towards Hispanic illegals is just ridiculous. For Pete's sake, not even the bill's proponents are trying to hide behind the mythical non-hispanic illegals.

And if they are illegal, they SHOULD be targeted. Legal Hispanics have NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT!!!!
 
Make up your mind.

There either ARE non-hispanic illegals or they're "mythical". You said both. They can't both exist and not exist.

Since they do exist, it's clear the Arizona bill is as applicable to them as to the hispanics.

The myth is not their existence, the myth is that their existence has anything to do with this law, or any anti-immigration laws in border states. Are you seriously suggesting that if Mexican illegal immigrants didn't exist, this law (or this thread) would still exist?
 
Same for me several years ago when I was stopped for speeding in Virginia. They had no problem finding my GA records on computers nor did they have any problems confirming my then-fiancee's car registration (also in GA).

Exactly.

No problem at all finding the records of a lawful resident who presents his legally required license at a lawful traffic stop.

Let's see....the law requires ALL drivers of motor vehicles to have their license with them. Therefore, there's no conflict if the cop arrests the person driving a car without a license. It's not the cop's job to selectively enforce laws.

Therefore, TODAY any police officer in Arizona has the authority to arrest any suspected illegal alien who cannot produce a valid drivers license when stopped driving a car. The officer also has the authority to arrest those with him in the vehicle.

When an officer arrives at a domestic violence complaint asking for ID is perfectly routine. People who refuse to comply and who are then arrested aren't being "targeted", they're interfering with a police investigation.

All SB1070 does is formalize what could be performed currently under the law.

Deal with it.
 
The myth is not their existence, the myth is that their existence has anything to do with this law, or any anti-immigration laws in border states. Are you seriously suggesting that if Mexican illegal immigrants didn't exist, this law (or this thread) would still exist?

Probably wouldn't because the numbers that are a crushing burden to the State of Arizona wouldn't force it to take this action. Are you denying that it is a problem? Are you denying that the feds are doing little or nothing about it? Or, do you agree with their assertion that they have a RIGHT to migrate to the Southwest???
 
Never in my life have I seen such an uproar over people trying to follow the law:roll:

It sends a nice message to criminals: laws are to be overlooked and even changed. :(
 
And if they are illegal, they SHOULD be targeted. Legal Hispanics have NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT!!!!

They don't now, that the part of the law requiring legal immigrants to carry papers has been shot down. Unless, of course, you think they might be worried about their family being deported. But don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that illegal immigration should be tolerated, although I think there is a separate argument there, I'm not trying to have it here. I'm simply saying that to pretend this is about any race of illegal immigrants is just that, pretending. There's more illegal Mexicans in Arizona than there are illegal anything in the whole country. While if anything this suggests the need for a law such as sb1070, let's not pretend it's coincidence.
 
They don't now, that the part of the law requiring legal immigrants to carry papers has been shot down. Unless, of course, you think they might be worried about their family being deported. But don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that illegal immigration should be tolerated, although I think there is a separate argument there, I'm not trying to have it here. I'm simply saying that to pretend this is about any race of illegal immigrants is just that, pretending. There's more illegal Mexicans in Arizona than there are illegal anything in the whole country. While if anything this suggests the need for a law such as sb1070, let's not pretend it's coincidence.

Federal law already requires it. Law in nearly every country in the world required legal aliens to keep their paperwork on their person at all times.
 
I really am starting to wonder about the world that I am living in: it is a normal thing to have I.D. and if you are in this country? What is sooooooo frigging off putting about having to have something to show it? Give me a break.
 
The myth is not their existence, the myth is that their existence has anything to do with this law, or any anti-immigration laws in border states. Are you seriously suggesting that if Mexican illegal immigrants didn't exist, this law (or this thread) would still exist?

The myth is that Arizona's law is unconstitutional.

No, if Mexican invaders didn't exist, the issue with illegal aliens could be treated by the extant force of ICE and DHS incompetents.

Since there's something close to thirty million invaders, the federal agencies tasked with dealing with immigration violations are swamped and unable to control the issue. However, every level of government has agents who deal with vast numbers of the public in situations that authorize them to check ID. Putting those agents to work in support of federal law is a logical use of coordinated resources, just as local police turn captured counterfeiters over to the Secret Service.

You support, I"m sure, when the National Guard is called up to help some hick town fend off a flood or a fire, don't you?

So there's no logical objections to the use local law enforcement to assist in containing the federal government is obligated to address but has both refused and failed to do so.
 
I really am starting to wonder about the world that I am living in: it is a normal thing to have I.D. and if you are in this country? What is sooooooo frigging off putting about having to have something to show it? Give me a break.

I am white and in a very small minority in this country, and an even smaller minority in that I am a citizen. As a citizen here, I am not required to have my ID card one me (though before my citizenship status was confirmed, I was required to). I have never had a problem with that here, however, though people are often surprised when I tell them I an a citizen of this country...

What is wrong with immigrants who are legal resident aliens being required to retain their papers? Nothing at all. It is already the law in the U.S. and most other countries around the world.
 
Federal law already requires it. Law in nearly every country in the world required legal aliens to keep their paperwork on their person at all times.

I'm sorry, I may be using the wrong words (If you know the right ones feel free to share), by legal immigrant I meant a naturalized citizen, whom under the original bill would be required to carry their documentation, they currently are NOT required to do this under federal law. Legal aliens, citizens of another country, are required to carry their documentation. Naturalized citizens are not, nor should they be.
 
The myth is that Arizona's law is unconstitutional.

No, if Mexican invaders didn't exist, the issue with illegal aliens could be treated by the extant force of ICE and DHS incompetents.

Since there's something close to thirty million invaders, the federal agencies tasked with dealing with immigration violations are swamped and unable to control the issue. However, every level of government has agents who deal with vast numbers of the public in situations that authorize them to check ID. Putting those agents to work in support of federal law is a logical use of coordinated resources, just as local police turn captured counterfeiters over to the Secret Service.

You support, I"m sure, when the National Guard is called up to help some hick town fend off a flood or a fire, don't you?

So there's no logical objections to the use local law enforcement to assist in containing the federal government is obligated to address but has both refused and failed to do so.

Yes! Now we are closer to the same page. This law is designed to stop Mexican illegal immigrants, because that's the real problem! Asian and other ethnicities might be the problem if they can walk or swim here, but they can't, only Mexicans (and South Americans) can, so they are the real problem. When the right wing pretends that this law is just as much for other races it's clearly not true, and only lends an air of legitimacy to the cries of "racist". It doesn't help that some supporters of this bill ARE racist, or hopelessly stupid, such as Jan Brewer stating that most Mexicans come here not to work but to mule drugs.
 
I'm sorry, I may be using the wrong words (If you know the right ones feel free to share), by legal immigrant I meant a naturalized citizen, whom under the original bill would be required to carry their documentation, they currently are NOT required to do this under federal law. Legal aliens, citizens of another country, are required to carry their documentation. Naturalized citizens are not, nor should they be.

A "legal immigrant" is a non-citizen lawful resident, NOT a naturalized citizen.

Naturalized citizens in every respect and are not required to carry any documentation any other citizen needs to have.

A person holding a green card is a legal immigrant, not a citizen. Green card holders may be issued valid state drivers licences, and with such, do not have to carry that green card with them.
 
I'm sorry, I may be using the wrong words (If you know the right ones feel free to share), by legal immigrant I meant a naturalized citizen, whom under the original bill would be required to carry their documentation, they currently are NOT required to do this under federal law. Legal aliens, citizens of another country, are required to carry their documentation. Naturalized citizens are not, nor should they be.

Please show where in the legislation it requires naturalized citizens to keep their papers. IN my reading of the law, that provision must have slipped me... (I wonder why??)
 
Please show where in the legislation it requires naturalized citizens to keep their papers. IN my reading of the law, that provision must have slipped me... (I wonder why??)
How does anyone prove their status without 'papers?'
 
Yes! Now we are closer to the same page. This law is designed to stop Mexican illegal immigrants, because that's the real problem!

Actually, I'm sure the cops in Arizona will be pleased as punch to capture invaders from Iran and Pakistan and the UAE, not to mention any Chinese spies that might try to come by their way.

Asian and other ethnicities might be the problem if they can walk or swim here, but they can't, only Mexicans (and South Americans) can, so they are the real problem.

Absolutely right.

It would never occur to anyone in Iran or Pakistan or China that if they bought their spies an airplane ticket to Mexico City that they could get spies to the US border to infiltrate the country. No, they'd never think of anything that complicated.

4,000 Captured Invaders from Terrorist Countries, 2005

When the right wing pretends that this law is just as much for other races it's clearly not true,

Cut the bull****.

Either cite the paragraphs in the specific law that state racial discrimination or stop trying to pretend it exists.

and only lends an air of legitimacy to the cries of "racist".

No, there's no legitimacy to your efforts to paint the law as racist when you cannot cite the racist specifics in the law.

There are no racist specifics in the law, so give up.

It doesn't help that some supporters of this bill ARE racist,

It's completely irrelevant to the law. Look at all the racists that voted for Obama.

or hopelessly stupid, such as Jan Brewer stating that most Mexicans come here not to work but to mule drugs.

ALL Mexicans who entered the nation illegally and every person of every other national origin who entered the country illegally deliberately broke the law, and that's the ONLY THING that matters.
 
Either cite the paragraphs in the specific law that state racial discrimination or stop trying to pretend it exists.



No, there's no legitimacy to your efforts to paint the law as racist when you cannot cite the racist specifics in the law.

There are no racist specifics in the law, so give up.



It's completely irrelevant to the law. Look at all the racists that voted for Obama.



ALL Mexicans who entered the nation illegally and every person of every other national origin who entered the country illegally deliberately broke the law, and that's the ONLY THING that matters.
A cop could stop a person who was going 2 mph over the speed limit and let the white folks go who are going much faster. It doesn't take much imagination use the law against the brown people. Does it?

No matter, the law will never see the light of day, IMO.
 
Nothing unrealistic about the realization that if enough employers of these invaders are fined and jailed, the other employers will get the picture and the invaders won't have any jobs.

No jobs means no rent payments.

No rent payments means no roof.

No roof means "goin' back home", just like many of the Invaders in Arizona are doing.

You have noticed the invaders are leaving Arizona like rats fleeing a cooling camel corpse, haven't you? The rest of us have. Funny effect that, for a law that hasn't even been enforced yet. Just wait until the Robert's court properly declares the provisions of the law Constitutional and other states rush to copy it. That will put huge pressures on the remaining states to follow suit, too.

Again, the solution is that simple. It's called "enforce existing law". Which all that SB1070 allows Arizona police to do, and nothing more than that.

I absolutely agree with your first statement.... we should be enforcing existing federal law that requires employers to only hire those that have the right to work in the US. You do this the jobs dry up and there is no reason for illegals to stay here. Funny, this law does nothing to encourage this. It only seeks to terrorize individuals one at a time.

The hypocrisy in this is that very few are are really serious about illegal immigration. They just like the politics of populism. If we were interested, we would have a comprehensive solution to it that would include enforcement at the employer level. The problem, however, is that too many people like the cheap labor (same exact problem that led to the continuation of slavery and then the civil war). Until people are willing to approach this issue at multiple facets, then this is just noise and not worthy of anyone's time. This idea of round 'em up one at at time and ship 'em home is a complete farce and largely appeals to the racists among us.

As to the law "allowing" police enforcement of existing laws... that is not correct. This law mandates police enforcement. It re-prioritizes them. The police are currently free to enforce existing state and federal laws.
 
Last edited:
A cop could stop a person who was going 2 mph over the speed limit and let the white folks go who are going much faster. It doesn't take much imagination use the law against the brown people. Does it?

No matter, the law will never see the light of day, IMO.

So in other words you have nothing but conspiracy theories about what the cops might do. You do not have any actual proof or evidence of racial discrimination, racial profiling or racism in the bill. What do you think would happen if Obama had the AG sue over racial profiling in the bill? The courts would laugh their ass off at them even the left circuit court of appeals would have to admit that there is no racial profiling or discrimination in the bill and that it doesn't even allow for those things. Thats why Obama is having the AG sue over supremacy clause because they know that any claims of racism and racial profiling in the bill are complete bull ****.
 
Only immigrants are required to do so... this is already in the federal law...
Are you avoiding answering my specific question or not understanding what I am asking? I'll grant you the fact that its federal law that immigrants carry proof, so what? Do you fail at logic? How does a American citizen (say of Mexican descent) prove they are citizens?
 
Back
Top Bottom