How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Still think the Republican led AZ legisl   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  ]
 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Still think the Republican led AZ legislature isn't racist?

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


325 posted 07-08-2010 07:09 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



      I believe that even non citizens have rights in the United States, Grinch.  The rights of citizens may be more extensive.  The notion that non-citizens in the United States have no rights comes as a complete shock to me.  The government may sometimes want to wish those rights away, just as it may wish to ignore the rights of citizens.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


326 posted 07-08-2010 08:04 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


Good catch Bob, they do indeed have rights, just not as many as citizens of the US – I should have been more specific.

My bad.

Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


327 posted 07-12-2010 12:22 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.

“The Arizona law is a narrow measure that mirrors federal law -- making the Justice Department's preemption argument a difficult one, at best. Because other kinds of pre-emption don't apply, the department can only win if it can show a conflict with federal law. But there is no federal statute that Arizona's law conflicts with. The department's legal filings don't offer any answer to this fundamental problem.

The opinions of the Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, Ninth and Tenth Circuits of the US Court of Appeals (which are all of the circuits that have addressed the issue) also support the authority of Arizona to enact its law.
So do the two relevant opinions of the US Supreme Court. Another obstacle for the Obama administration is the fact that the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel in 2002 authored an opinion holding that state police officers have the authority to arrest illegal aliens -- the same authority underlying the Arizona law. Consequently, the department is arguing against its own previous opinion.  . .

Kris W. Kobach is a professor at the Univer sity of Missouri (Kansas City) School of Law. He served as Attorney General John Ashcroft's counsel and chief adviser on immigration law during 2001-03 and co-authored Arizona's im migration law. "


Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/be hind_us_arizona_pure_politics_doTiHt4iEpjt4mlSMPMvlO#ixzz0tUADfWCw

.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


328 posted 07-12-2010 02:01 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch

quote:
So do the two relevant opinions of the US Supreme Court. Another obstacle for the Obama administration is the fact that the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel in 2002 authored an opinion holding that state police officers have the authority to arrest illegal aliens -- the same authority underlying the Arizona law.


They can detain illegal aliens for being illegal aliens Huan, that’s a given, what they can’t do is detain legal citizens until they prove they’re not illegal aliens – that’s unconstitutional.

.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


329 posted 07-12-2010 02:14 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.

"They can detain illegal aliens for being illegal aliens Huan, that’s a given, what they can’t do is detain legal citizens until they prove they’re not illegal aliens – that’s unconstitutional."

Can federal officers do that?

I don't understand how everybody including the authors would miss that . . .

.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


330 posted 07-12-2010 03:59 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch

quote:
Can federal officers do that


Can they detain legal citizens until they produce documentary evidence of citizenship? Nope. They can detain illegal citizens or illegal aliens though.

Your constitution protects legal citizens against unlawful detention and false arrest. A federal officer could claim qualified immunity for falsely detaining a US citizen, the defence they normally use if they accidentally detain the wrong person. They’d have a hard time winning that particular argument though if they detained a US citizen claiming they had reasonable cause to believe that he/she couldn’t produce documentary evidence that he/she isn't constitutionally obliged to produce in the first place.

You have the right to remain silent Huan(apart from supplying your name).

quote:
I don't understand how everybody including the authors would miss that


It’s not hard to see why, everyone is busy to be concentrating on the rights of illegal aliens but forgetting that the Arizona law, like all laws, is applicable to everyone.

The Arizona police will illegally detain legal citizens as well as legally detain illegal aliens and if doing so infringes on the rights of the legal citizen then the law is unconstitutional.

.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


331 posted 07-12-2010 05:51 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


"Can they detain legal citizens until they produce documentary evidence of citizenship? Nope."


So illegals can just remain silent and
absent any other reason for detention
they would have to be released regardless
who is doing the asking because of the
risk a legal citizen is being asked.
Cool.

.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


332 posted 07-12-2010 07:11 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch

quote:
So illegals can just remain silent and
absent any other reason for detention
they would have to be released regardless
who is doing the asking because of the
risk a legal citizen is being asked


Ultimately yes. Only that’s looking at it from a glass half-empty perspective – the upside is that the prospect of a legal citizen being detained for no reason is drastically reduced. There’s a cost to all that freedom everyone seems so attached to, in this case you buy personal freedom and protection against wrongful detention at the cost of your ability to recognise and detain illegal aliens.

Which for most folk is pretty cool.

What Arizona should have done is followed Oklahoma’s lead – instead of risking a breach of legal citizen’s rights they should have chosen to concentrate on the other section of society that have reduced rights – the illegal citizens.

.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


333 posted 07-13-2010 02:48 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     John, American laws are constructed around the Constitution, which is supposed to protect people from the state doing illegal sorts of things.  The notion is that it's better to make an error on the side of presumption of innocence, remember?  

     Cool.

    
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


334 posted 07-13-2010 02:54 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     You might also be interested in looking up a bit more about Kris W. Kobach.  Your comments about him being a professor at the University of Missouri School of Law and about being an advisor for the Ashcroft Justice Department are certainly 100% true.  You might also check him out with Klan Watch and some of the folks who keep track of the neo-nazi organizations and those who support them.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


335 posted 07-13-2010 11:14 AM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.

So once across the border
you enter a country by it's own constitution
incapable, (so long as silence is maintained), of defending itself?

What if as a consequence of illegal immigration
there was the clear prospect of that constitution being ultimately voided by
a religious ideology that demanded instead utter obedient submission
to a way of being inimical to individual freedoms and liberties?  

.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


336 posted 07-13-2010 11:24 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

incapable...and unwilling, John.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


337 posted 07-13-2010 04:36 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.

Did those that wrote the Constitution
have that in mind?  

.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


338 posted 07-13-2010 05:58 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

What they had in mind, John, was protecting this country from the kind of aggressive law enforcement that has otherwise been rampant throughout history. Throwing someone in jail while you thought about what charges might stick was common a few hundred years ago. Charges might not be filed for a week. Or a month. Or sometimes ever.

"Innocent until proven guilty" is more than just a catchy slogan. People can't be legally detained for ANY crime without due process, including probable cause. That's a real problem when the only probable cause is the color of a man's skin.

It's always frustrating when a legal technicality lets a murderer walk free. And, yea, I'm sure it's equally frustrating when someone you just know is here illegally (sic) can't be seized because doing so will inevitably infringe on the rights of a citizen. Those legal technicalities really suck. Until perhaps you remember they're also called freedoms?

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


339 posted 07-14-2010 04:27 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     John, the religious ideology that the constitution is most in danger of being voided by through inaction is the ideology of bigotry.  It proposes radical solutions to the behavior of other people, and forbids its own members access to mirrors.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


340 posted 07-14-2010 11:19 AM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


“a Pew Hispanic Center study shows 17-percent of all construction workers are in the United States illegally. Reid says not in Nevada. "That may be some place, but it's not here in Nevada."”

http://www.8newsnow.com/Global/story.asp?S=12793540


or Arizona . . .

How many does 17% translate to?
.

“Illegal immigrants work in many sectors of the U.S. economy. According to National Public Radio, about 3 percent work in agriculture; 33 percent have jobs in service industries; and substantial numbers can be found in construction and related occupations (16 percent), and in production, installation, and repair (17 percent).[4] According to USA Today, about 4 percent work in farming; 21 percent have jobs in service industries; and substantial numbers can be found in construction and related occupations (19 percent), and in production, installation, and repair (15 percent), with 12% in sales, 10% in management, and 8% in transportation.[5] “

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigration_to_the_United_States#Breakdown_by_state

.

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


341 posted 07-14-2010 09:41 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Thanks for the reference to the Wikipedia article, John, which I find very useful and whose attempt at neutrality I admire.  Here, as generally, they make a pretty good job of it, and I appreciate how well you use their facts.  

     As with a lot of these issues, the public feeling varies with the level of employment in the general population.  As unemployment goes up, the feeling toward immigrants, legal and not, does the same sort of thing that feelings toward the unemployed and the homeless do.  That is, they become more hostile.  

     That doesn't mean that everybody needs to be thrilled at the illegal immigrants.  That would be asking more than I could expect the country to supply.  We do not have an open immigration policy.  We should keep in mind that these feelings change as the economics improve, and that a considerable part of the difficulty is a reflection of the hard times we're going through as a country.

     And some of it is a result of the misinformation supplied by Mr. Limbaugh and friends, as is also documented in your article.  Misinformation about mortgages, specifically, but also apparently misinformation about crime and crime statistics if the general information in your reference article can be nailed down.  At a minimum, the article says that the claim for increased crime in the areas that the Right has been claiming it for does not have good statistics to back it up.  They have no backing with which to make these claims, if what your article says is true.

    It also says that the Immigrants do cost the states money in social services, if not a great deal, which is something I would have disagreed with before looking at the article.  Interesting.

     Again, thanks for the reference.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


342 posted 07-15-2010 09:12 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

DETROIT – States have the authority to enforce immigration laws and protect their borders, Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox said Wednesday in a legal brief on behalf of nine states supporting Arizona's immigration law.

Cox, one of five Republicans running for Michigan governor, said Michigan is the lead state backing Arizona in federal court and is joined by Alabama, Florida, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas and Virginia, as well as the Northern Mariana Islands.

The Arizona law, set to take effect July 29, directs officers to question people about their immigration status during the enforcement of other laws such as traffic stops and if there's a reasonable suspicion they're in the U.S. illegally.

President Barack Obama's administration recently filed suit in federal court to block it, arguing immigration is a federal issue. The law's backers say Congress isn't doing anything meaningful about illegal immigration, so it's the state's duty to step up.

"Arizona, Michigan and every other state have the authority to enforce immigration laws, and it is appalling to see President Obama use taxpayer dollars to stop a state's efforts to protect its own borders," Cox said in a statement.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100715/ap_on_re_us/us_immigration_states


Looks like our taxpayer dollars are going to a lot of lawsuits against 1/5 of the country. When will Obama decide to sue the "sanctuary" cities??
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


343 posted 07-15-2010 09:14 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K

     Spending taxpayer dollars?

     Looks like our Republican Donor Dollars are doing a lot to incite civil disobedience around constitutional issues in a lot of states, and The Republican Party feels the expense is worth it.  The Republican Party seems to have a beef with a lot of elements of the constitution, including elements of the Constitution dealing with Search and Seizure, Probable Cause, and Habeas Corpus.  There are probably others that don't come to mind — oh, yes, Equal Protections — right off the bat, but this doesn't seem to keep the Critters from trying to wrap themselves in the flag and pretending they've got a monopoly on the thing they're apparently trying so earnestly to undermine.

     There have been some fine Republicans in the history of this country, and I've praised them in these pages with a fair frequency.  I think the bunch we've got around now would cause most of the folks I most admire in that party, the Eisenhowers and the Roosevelts and the Lincolns, to blink hard, like somebody slapped across the face, at how the attempts those fine Republicans of the Past had made to preserve America from The Military Industrial Complex, from the depredations of environmental degradation and economic and political monopolies, and the forces of bigotry, hatred and American rage turned on itself, how these honest attempts had come to this pitiful collaboration with the very forces that the Republican Party had once stood against.

     Health Care was a program that I believe started with the Republicans of Roosevelt's time.  So was the attempt to rein in the runaway power of Wall Street and the trusts.  Attempts to make sure that money was directed toward the needy, and toward schools were strongly supported by Eisenhower.  He mourned that money might need to go to bombers instead of schools.  The Republican Party of today seems more like Lincoln's opposition than it does like the party that elected Lincoln.

     They seem more as though they were against the Union than they do in favor of it, today.  They even makes noises about backing the secession movement in Texas.  Now, of course, they squawk about persecution by the NAACP, though the logic of how the least powerful 11% or so of the people in the country are going to lord it over the Most Powerful 60% or so has not yet quite managed to reveal itself to me.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


344 posted 07-15-2010 10:34 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Mysteria
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Laureate
since 03-07-2001
Posts 19652
British Columbia, Canada


345 posted 07-16-2010 12:19 AM       View Profile for Mysteria   Email Mysteria   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Mysteria

Officer Sues Over Arizona Immigrant Law (Fox News)

And, also  Wall Street Journal
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


346 posted 07-16-2010 03:40 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Interesting cartoon.

     Now, which articles of the constitution is he trying to undermine?  And what are the facts that lead you to draw those conclusions?  

     I made an effort to be specific, Mike, and you've seen me go into details on pretty much each of those issues when I discussed them in previous postings.  If there's something you disagree with me about concerning any of my statements, I'd love to hear about it, if you can offer any support to bolster your point of view.

     In the meantime, I'll be headed off on vacation for a week or two, and probably won't be able to respond to comments for a while after perhaps midafternoon west coast time on Friday.
    
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


347 posted 07-16-2010 08:42 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Ah, Bob, what an exchange that would be between us. You would have a rebuttal and I would rebuttal and get rebuttlaled...and so on.

When you claimed Arizona was the only state where you had to show a birth certificate to get a D.L. and I pointed out Florida was the same, you simply called Florida basically wacky and biased anyway and avoided the fact they did. When you made the case for the school not sending their team to Arizona for fear of their safety and even made a case of it, I knew we  were not going to arrive at agreements about basically anything, and that was before Shabazz! If there are speeches about Obama disregarding the Bill of Rights and people out there cartooning it,I must not be the only one who feels that way. As far as Obama, the congress and the constitution..

.




Enjoy your vacation, Bob. it's always good to get away....
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


348 posted 07-16-2010 03:02 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Didn't think you could cite evidence. You yourself made a couple of rash statements about how dangerous Arizona was, didn't you, something about the number of kidnappings and so forth in the state, and how terribly violent it was.  

     Your point was that the state was so dangerous with all those evil people running around we needed to suspend the constitution, so the police could kill them all lest they polute the purity of our fluids and send copies of Playboy through the mails.

     I said that the state was not that violent.

     In regard to the high school championships, I said that the that school board made a judgement about what they thought the atmosphere was like.

     It seems like quite a coincidence that their estimate turned out to be the same as yours, doesn't it?  

     In fact, if everybody shared your estimate of the violence down there, I can't imagine why anybody would go there at all.  You've made it sound like the whole place is ready to burst into armed revolt, and as though bullets are flying everywhere.  You'd want your kids to visit a place like that?  Pfui!  I'm even more sympathetic to the school board.

     Fortunately, the reality is very different, isn't it?  

     Not going down there would be a political decision for me.  I think the state made a biggoted political decision, one that went against the constitution on a number of grounds.

      I did enjoy the cartoon, and I always enjoy the back and forth.  A good man to have as a friend.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


349 posted 07-16-2010 04:14 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


What happens to the people that the Arizona officers detain, those who can’t produce documented evidence of citizenship?

Does anyone know?

.
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Still think the Republican led AZ legisl   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors