Judge Susan Bolton is wrong.What the federal court has done in the ruling this Wednesday, is allow the federal government to continue doing as little as humanly possible to enforce our Immigration laws.
There are times when I scratch my head and ask, why do my brothers and sisters on the left, not see the damage afflicted to the U. S. by the continued drug and human trafficking that the Federal government seems to care less about. This would be the government that was controlled by both parties in the House and Senate and under Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush and now Obama.
To me, it's very simple. People come to this country to seek a better life, support their families and reach for the American dream. Here's the catch...WE want you to do it legally. Yeah, I know...too much to ask.
Thousands of new residents come here from other countries annually through the proper channels. They are subjected to Criminal and Medical Checks, Pay serious fees and succumb to random, and often invasive, home inspections while enduring the process. Many would like a simpler process but for the ultimate privilege of becoming a US citizen, they put up with it.
Not so for 12 - 20 million illegal immigrants. (Estimates vary when they either include overstays or not) There are plenty of people here in the US that simply didn't bother to check in when they entered the country. People who are unknown to our government. When I say unknown, I mean we don't know their criminal or medical history.
I know, the Amnesty/Open Borders advocates will surely beat me up for even pointing these facts out, but those are the facts. It's tough to "refudiate" them.
As for the Arizona law, there's still plenty left in the legislation that supporters are cheering. Arizona will be able to block state officials from so-called "sanctuary city" policies limiting enforcement of federal law; require that state officials work with federal officials on illegal immigration; allow civil suits over sanctuary cities; and to make it a crime to pick up day laborers.
Something the Judge failed to address when she was giving the green light to Coyotes south of the border. Striking down these "sanctuary city" policies has always been the No. 1 priority during this whole process.
Just the idea that the local municipalities will no-longer be able to block state agencies from enforcing immigration laws within their borders is a serious triumph to law enforcement. No matter where the issue ends up during the appeal process, Arizona will have some additional tools to work with.
Sheriff Arpaio, one of the more vocal advocates for real border security, indicated that the ruling by Judge Bolton merely lifts the mandatory requirement that officers ask for residency papers during an arrest. It doesn't prohibit officers from asking. What he told viewers on CNN is he would like those who broke the law to spend some time in jail before handing them over to ICE. That way they would experience some kind of penalty for the crime rather than a pampered bus trip back to Durango.This whole set of events has also highlighted that our Federal Government has failed us on the immigration issue. There are many laws on the books pertaining to legal status already. Most resemble what Arizona was attempting to do through their own resources. But the desire to pander and mince words on the campaign trail has lead our Federal leadership to give a one finger salute to our border patrol and local law enforcement. That goes for all 50 states.
Judge Susan Bolton is wrong on the issue of State's rights and the protection of it's citizens and I look forward to the Supreme Court's handling of this case.
12 comments:
Good God Madsen, are you telling me if you were in a position of authority and could enforce local, state and federal laws, you would?
I have yet to hear anyone else on any campaign trail say such a thing. Too bad youre not running for one of the positions this year.
PJ
Ahem...
14th Amendment.
Look it up.
You touched on this subject at the end of your show Wednesday night. I never took you for a "law & Order" guy. Very interesting.
I don't understand those that call this law racist. Local PD's can not attempt to figure out immigration status unless they have the person on another charge to cause the police contact. This is similar to the theory that you can not be charged with DWI alone, you must first be pulled over for something else (eg. speeding).
Now if we compare this with enforcement practice of Federal ICE Agents who can roll up on any job site and start asking for papers based on the appearance of the individual and the fact that they are working on a construction site. This is perfectly legal and ok with the feds. I have seen it happen many times as I am sure you have too.
Which system sounds more racist to you? I think the feds should leave the state alone to do the job that the feds refuse to do and start evaluating their own laws and procedures.
Mike, I now have even more respect for you. This law was put in place because Washington is not doing what it is tasked to do...Protect our country. There are others who are using the boarder to bring in human traffic, drugs and foreign agents that may be planning harm to our country. Imigration has made this country great, but we need to know who is comming in and why.
1:08 -
You reference the Fourteenth Amendment, yet you don't say what you mean. The Fourteenth Amendment does not address immigration. The closest it comes is saying that those born here are automatically citizens. It doesn't say that their parents should be given any favorable treatment if they came here in violation of our laws.
The fact is, the issue of illegal aliens should be of equal concern to both Liberals and Conservatives.
Conservatives are concerned with issues of border security, fiscal questions and the impropriety of selfishly violating our laws out of personal interest.
Liberals should be concerned with jobs which are taken by illegals, denying opportunities to Americans. While the myth is that illegals only take jobs which Americans do not want, the reality is that with readily available false paperwork, illegals can get any job for which they are qualified and many for which they are not. There are - by some estimates - 13 million illegal aliens in the U.S. There aren't nearly enough "jobs Americans don't want" to provide for all the illegals in this country.
And - by the way - there are no illegal immigrants. Immigrants are those who come to this country legally. Those who come here illegally are not immigrants. They are trespassers, interlopers, criminals. Oh, and it is neither racism nor discrimination to say so, either. It is a statement of fact that applies to anyone here in contravention of law, regardless of where he or she comes from originally.
It's time for the Left to knock off the "racism" lies and address the issue for what it is: criminals coming here and spitting on our laws.
I think the majority of comments you have received so far on this subject are saying the same thing...let's control our borders and enforce existing laws with regards to those entering the United State illegaly and let's stop all the posturing by politicians including President Obama to curry favor with one group or another. Yuh think.
The Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency expects to deport about 400,000 people this fiscal year, nearly 10 percent above the Bush administration's 2008 total and 25 percent more than were deported in 2007. The pace of company audits has roughly quadrupled since President Bush's final year in office.
While the administration focuses on some illegal immigrants with criminal records, others are allowed to remain free, creating a "sense of impunity" As long as they keep their heads down, they're in the clear.
It's not that different from what you've been asking for Mike.
TRB
You've all heard the slogan that our immigration laws are broke and need fixing? That is the rhetoric of the 20 million illegals and La Raza, their advocacy group.
Our immigration laws are the most liberal and generous in the world.
Our immigration laws work spectacularly well -- when enforced.
We screen people because as much as we'd like to let everybody in, letting everybody in is not a good idea.
Have you read Schumer's bill? It's as "open borders" as you can get. Schumer's bill says to the world not only will the 20 million be allowed to stay, but visas, passports, ids, naturalization, screening for disease, background checks, and the rest of the immigration process are for suckers who like standing at the end of the line while cheats get in front of them.
How do we do it people?
Paul
As one of your liberal friends...you miss the point. First the decision was a constitutional one. It is the role of the Federal Government to control the borders. If this law passed we would have 50 different laws governing immigration.
No one can argue with maintaining strict borders and security. However everytime the Democrats put forth the idea of comprehensive legislation that deals with security, penalities for employers of illegals and a rational method to deal with the millions already in the country the Republicans go back to dealing only with security and cry out "amnesty", a red herring. They are against a national ID card. Hey you need a license to drive,we have social security number etc. what's the big deal about ID cards? The Republicans want the Feds to do the job, then reject ID cards because "they don't trust the Federal Government". What is it about having your cake and eating it too.
Anyone who has followed my posts in the past, knows I am all for the National ID, the BioMetric and EVerify employee system.
I would ask those who really want to act on immigration reform to drop the "amnesty" issue until after the bulk of the issue is solved.
Here in NY, we just saw the legislature act on the Farmworkers Rights issue which asks those who wish to participate to provide legal residency papers to join. Many Democrats didn't know that I guess.
The whole State vs Fed issue exposes the reality that the Fed is intentionally ignoring the immigration issue. Question is, if the Fed wants the State to stop enforcing Fed laws, what other Fed laws should the states stop enforcing?
Lets compare what differences there are in our laws, itemize what we aren't compelled to enforce by state, and just stop enforcing Federal law, since they don't want states to do Federal enforcement.
Looks like I have a homework assignment.
Are the Democrats in power trying to curry favor with the predominently illegal hispanic population that is here ? Possibly the same strategy from the previous Presidential office holder? Future voters for all parties? This is not meant to be a racist statement but it is an obvious fact that Mexico borders us on the South and that seems to be where the 'hole" is. How many Canadians or other illegal immigrants sneak into the US via our northern border.? Not as many, I am sure. How many do we see abandoning their personal possessions to swim across the Niagara River into Buffalo? Hiding in ditches along the way? If we are truthful with ourselves we will see that most of the illegal entry into US comes from the south and the countries below that are mainly hispanic. I would be curious to see how many Asians, Europeans and Africans come thru that portal. You don't see those people standing on corners waiting for day jobs. Most of the crimes on the border towns are done by Mexicans/Hispanics and that is a recorded fact. If we stop with all of the political correctness and really address this issue we might actually get something done. How about protecting us Legal citizens ? How about enforcing federal laws? How about a class action suit from American citizens suing the Feds for dereliction of their duties? Arizona is taking a step in the right direction because they were left with no other alternatives and limited resources. I find it offensive that the marches in the different cities across America were protesting the law AZ was trying to initiate. Protestors, walk a mile in an Arizonian shoe.
Post a Comment